- From: David Sussman <davids@ipona.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:24:12 -0000
- To: "'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Ahh, I see. I assumed there was some reason for it, and performance is a good enough one! My first thoughts were that it seemed odd that you were implementing something similar, and maybe duplicating effort. Thanks Dave Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org> wrote in message news:<6553BCF3E25DD2118F0A00AA00AE6AAA178F10@tigger>... > > > I've just seen the details for the new release of the W3C server - > > Jigsaw and spotted the details of the XML format and the > administration > > protocol (http://www.w3.org/Jigsaw/Doc/Programmer/JigXML.html). Is it > > just me or is this not in DAV format? Does this seem a bit strange? > > > > I'm generally just a snooper in the mailing list, but this confused > me. > > Jigsaw is not using DAV but a format that is more suited to a fast > serialization/deserialization scheme. The fact that the admin protocol > is > using the same language is just legacy from the previous version and > actually we are thinking about using it for the admin protocols. The 2.1 > track is meant to change with the possibility to do incompatible changes > like upgrading the admin protocol ;) > > /\ - Yves Lafon - World Wide Web Consortium - > /\ / \ Architecture Domain - Jigsaw Activity Leader > / \ \/\ > / \ / \ http://www.w3.org/People/Lafon - ylafon@w3.org >
Received on Friday, 5 November 1999 07:00:40 UTC