- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 09:27:44 +0200
- To: Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Helge Hess wrote: > > On 20.10.2008, at 22:40, Brian Smith wrote: >>> Proposal 1 IMHO breaks the PUT semantics (that's why I started this >>> thread). >> >> Proposal 1 was: "Simply do allow that use case. WebDAV clients already >> expect the server to create the resources at the URI they are given. >> This is a pretty fundamental part of WebDAV; an extension of WebDAV >> that didn't support it isn't an extension at all." >> >> In other words, just let the client pick the URI like we always have >> in WebDAV, and don't attempt to support servers that do not want to >> let the client pick the URI. There is nothing that breaks PUT's >> semantics there. > > > +1 > > I actually prefer that over adding some custom POST to CardDAV / xyz. Of course that's one possibility. However, I have my doubts. CalDAV does the same, server implementers have been complaining about the unnecessary overhead. Because of it, some servers use a workaround that's not allowed per RFC2616, and clients are expected to deal with it. That really sounds like a problem looking for a proper solution, sorry. BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 21 October 2008 07:28:29 UTC