- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 09:11:02 +0100
- To: "Jim Whitehead" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>, <acl@webdav.org>, "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> 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