Re: A question on Versioning-unaware cl
Tim Ellison OTT (Tim_Ellison@oti.com)
Tue, 12 Oct 1999 09:54:09 -0400
From: Tim_Ellison@oti.com (Tim Ellison OTT)
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org (ietf-dav-versioning),
Message-ID: <1999Oct12.095233.1250.1348996@otismtp.ott.oti.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 09:54:09 -0400
Subject: RE: A question on Versioning-unaware cl
Larry wrote:
># I admit, that they typically share the same files on a disk and thereby
># share data, so you can 'put' with FTP and 'get' with HTTP, but that's not
># the protocols interoperating, that's merely a shared disk.
>
>http and ftp 'interoperate' because their URL schemes were designed
>to allow possible substitution of the scheme name while leaving the
>rest of the URL alone. The design decision to try to align the URL
>schemes was intentional and discussed at length. It wasn't really
>very successful: the cases where it is possible to do the substitution
>are rare.
.. and getting rarer as people use active server pages, JSP's, server side
includes, etc. that usually only come as part of HTTP server behavior.
Nowadays what you get via HTTP is unlikely to be what you get via FTP.
>If ftp didn't use the same hierarchical syntax as http, they wouldn't
>interoperate.
>
>Since WebDAV uses the same URL scheme as HTTP for its resources, it
>is reasonable to believe that FTP would continue to interoperate
>with WebDAV, if you 'put' with HTTP or webdav and 'get' with FTP.
>
>Whether or not ftp/webdav interoperability is "in scope" for the
>deltaV working group, it would be useful to at least note this
>issue as implementation advice.
What advice are you proposing? The URL formats are being well defined by
WebDAV.
>There was some hope that NFS (webnfs) and http would interoperate,
>too. A mapping between WebDAV and NFS v4 would be as interesting
>as the mapping with FTP.