Re: Some problems with the WebDAV protocol

Yoram Last wrote:
> It seems to me that some of your bogus (in my mind, at least) arguments
> below are the result of a misinterpretation of what the HTTP protocol
> is and how it works. I would thus like to start with a fairly general
> description.
>...
> So I'm really very sorry this is the case, and I tried to explain it as
> well as I could, and I'm sorry if I offended anyone in the process, and
> I'm tired myself of the whole thing, but I think that your protocol is
> broken and that you should fix it. It is your protocol and you can
> obviously do what you want, but trying to dismiss a significant design
> error by using faulty arguments will not solve the problem.

You open your email with a paragraph that is highly insulting and
patronizing to Jim, yet you don't understand how you are offending
people? Also, to come to Jim's aid here: I would simply state that he is
very well versed in HTTP/1.1. If he has a question, then he turns around
in his office to ask his office-mate Roy Fielding (and I'm sure you've
seen Roy's name on the HTTP/1.1 spec). Of the people involved in this
"discussion", I would suggest that your claim of a misinterpretation on
Jim's part is patently wrong. That said, it is also fair to note that
Roy said that he agreed with some of your points.

Regardless of the merits of your email, I only skimmed the thing. That
opening paragraph and the length simply made me say "fuck it" and ignore
it. You have zero credibility with me, and I would posit with many of
the others in this forum that you are attempting to "persuade".

You certainly won't "solve the problem" by offending people and trying
to overwhelm them with lengthy email.

Regards,
-g

--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

Received on Saturday, 24 April 1999 00:07:55 UTC