W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 1997

legacy clients

From: <Mark_Day/CAM/Lotus@lotus.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 14:56:50 -0400
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-Id: <85256445.005CFE5B.00@mta2.lotus.com>

Steve Carter wrote:

'So, Mark, you vote that we abandon all legacy clients and design the
*pure* protocol for WebDAV?'

In the absence of a compelling reason to carry some feature forward, you

It would be one thing if the argument for byte-range locking were "it's
really useful in general, so we shouldn't leave it out of any future
protocol, and look at these products to see how useful it can be."
It's quite another if the argument is "a bunch of products (including my
company's) use it, so we need it in the protocol."

If the protocol supports section locking, I bet that it can be used to
implement byte range locking (e.g. by mapping section numbers into byte
ranges) when the client and server know that's what's suitable for the
relevant resource. I doubt that the reverse is true.

Received on Friday, 21 February 1997 14:56:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:10 UTC