Re: Bindings, Locks, and MOVE

Do we think clients should be able to effect a cross server "move" with GET,
PROPFIND/PUT, PROPPATCH/DELETE? Seems like a minimal requirement for authoring
and publishing. If so, then wouldn't we like the server's MOVE to just something
similar in a single method to reduce network traffic and client complexity? Are
we making MOVE way too complicated, full of special cases, etc. I continue to
believe that any method whose semantics require a list of if-then-else's is
missing some underlying fundamental principal, will be difficult to implement,
difficult to test, introduce interoperability problems, and will be hard for
clients to use. Move with locks and references seems to have crossed the line.





John Stracke <francis@ecal.com> on 09/10/99 11:16:38 AM

To:   w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
cc:

Subject:  Re: Bindings, Locks, and MOVE




"Yaron Goland (Exchange)" wrote:

> If you wish to do cross-server
> MOVEs you will need a new protocol because WebDAV can't do it.

Disturbing thought from the peanut gallery: cross-host MOVE (i.e., between two
URLs with different hostnames) is not necessarily cross-server, because they
could be hosted on the same machine.  So, sometimes, something that looks like
a cross-server MOVE may work.  But usually it won't.  And, in some cases, a
user may find it works for a while and then stops, when his admin splits the
server up.  Or vice versa.  Fun, no? :-)

--
/============================================================\
|John Stracke    |http://www.ecal.com|My opinions are my own.|
|Chief Scientist |===========================================|
|eCal Corp.      |I'm a .sig virus...and, boy, am I tired!   |
|francis@ecal.com|                                           |
\============================================================/

Received on Friday, 10 September 1999 12:40:55 UTC