RE: content type for WebDAV request/response bodies, was: [ACL] Access Control Protocol -07 submitted

> From: acl-admin@webdav.org [mailto:acl-admin@webdav.org]On Behalf Of Jim
> Whitehead
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 2:10 AM
> To: acl@webdav.org; WebDAV
> Subject: RE: content type for WebDAV request/response bodies, was: [ACL]
> Access Control Protocol -07 submitted
>
>
> It seems reasonable to me to add this text. I'd also go further, and
> explicitly note that validating requests and responses is generally a bad
> idea. IETF protocols should be strict in what they send, liberal in what

Well, it's not possible anyway, unless we have a proper definition of what
this means for WebDAV. The DTD as it stands won't do it.

> they accept. Strict checking of a DAV message for validity is
> more stringent
> than is necessary to interpret the meaning of the message. It has been my
> experience that implementations that do require strict validity tend to be
> much less interoperable, since they tend to reject XML that most other
> implementations accept without any problem. This is why the DAV spec. has
> never required anything more than well formedness.

Well, XML does "draconian" error checking on accept, and this is one of the
reasons *why* XML interoperability  is quite good. The main point is to
state the requirements clearly and early.

Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2001 03:11:32 UTC