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 15:44:07 -0800
Message-ID: <14c101bf8aea$8700a510$1918ccce@murphy>
To: "Larry Masinter" <LM@att.com>, "Mark Baker" <mark.baker@Canada.Sun.COM>
Cc: "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
>>doesn't explain what you want to be "two-way".

Here's the key quote:

"In other words, if you want the best Web editing environment, you have to
figure out how to connect the best writing, design and graphics tools to the
content system, as if they were Web browsers."

Imagine a word processor that's wired into a web site, not the kind of web
site that DAV supports, but a content managed website.

We could have built on DAV, but we would have only been able to do what it
permits, which isn't all that we want to do.

Rather than write a full specification for the software we already have
running, you could create your own site, learn how it works, and imagine a
writing, design and graphic tool that was designed to plug right into it.




----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Masinter" <LM@att.com>
To: "Dave Winer" <dave@userland.com>; "Mark Baker"
Cc: "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>; <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 3:35 PM
Subject: RE: The Two Way Web

> You don't give any reasons for not liking WebDAV, so it seems
> like NIH. ("I don't like it because I didn't invent it.")
> http://davenet.userland.com/2000/03/02/theTwowayweb
> doesn't explain what you want to be "two-way".
> The conventional way people support two-way in web applications is
> using forms (with file upload).
> WebDAV was intended to solve a larger set of problems with
> protocol and not UI-based content management, and it seems to
> do that.
> Larry
Received on Friday, 10 March 2000 18:43:58 UTC

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