W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2000

Re: The Two Way Web

From: Dave Winer <dave@userland.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 10:20:00 -0800
Message-ID: <13c501bf8abd$3fb6f470$1918ccce@murphy>
To: "Mark Baker" <mark.baker@Canada.Sun.COM>
Cc: "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
I've read that spec, have you read mine?


Sure we could somehow layer what we do on top of that, but that's what we
already do.

Content management is different from file replication.

More links here:



----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Baker" <mark.baker@Canada.Sun.COM>
To: "Dave Winer" <dave@userland.com>
Cc: "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>; <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: The Two Way Web

> Hi again Dave,
> I didn't want to let this thread die.  There's an extremely important
> issue that Dan has raised; what exactly is wrong with HTTP 1.1 for
> the Two Way Web?
> I'd ask this question to Ken too - what's wrong with HTTP 1.1?
> DWC includes getMessages() and postMessage() which appear to be
> similar to HTTP GET and POST at a first glance.  Have you seen DRP?
> It would appear to be a tool that could help you rearchitect DWhite
> to be more document-centric, and it doesn't use any unexpected HTTP
> extensions (it uses a new header, but in a completely supported way).
> http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-drp-19970825.html
> MB
> Dave Winer wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mark!
> >
> > For a browser-based web content system, you do not need any kind of RPC.
> > use HTML forms with textareas in Manila, just like Wiki.
> >
> > There's a lot of info about Manila on the web, the RPC interface,
> > marketing/positioning materials, even a site where you can create your
> > Manila site to experiment with. We've started over 3000 new sites in the
> > last couple of months, our users are very excited about where it's
going. As
> > I said in the piece later this month we'll release a desktop writing
> > for Windows/Mac that hooks into the RPC interfaces, imho, the first true
> > network-centered writing tool that isn't a web browser.
> >
> > But I don't want to just hurl URLs at you guys. One step at a time..
> >
> > About WebDAV, that's a FAQ. I don't like WebDAV. I don't know many other
> > people who do. Nice way to do websites if you're a Word user who doesn't
> > want to dive into the Web. That's not my market. (I can already feel the
> > flames coming at me. Hi Alex!)
> >
> > Dave
Received on Friday, 10 March 2000 13:19:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:09 UTC