- From: CJ Holmes <cholmes@4d.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 10:03:37 -0800
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
> From: CJ Holmes [mailto:cholmes@4d.com] > > Well, you can't always "just locate the source". If the source > really is in a different location than the "normal" URI then your > DAV module probably has no knowledge of it. Which means now you > have to teach JSP to be DAV-aware and answer PROPFIND requests, or > teach your DAV module all about what URIs are served by which other > modules and how the two URI spaces map to each other. > >My primary objection to GETSRC is that it represents a non-extensible >direction to follow. For example, one of the key purposes >of PROPFIND was to provide semantic indexing of web resources, and the >indexing of the display information should be significantly different >from the indexing of the source information. Once you have taught the >DAV module to understand the difference between display URL spaces and >source URL spaces, it can produce this kind of indexing. Similarly, >any other kind of method that could sensibly be applied to both the >display and authoring resources can take advantage of the separation >of display and authoring into separate identifiable URLs. I agree with all of this! I have no bones whatsoever to pick about the superiority of keeping source and display resources separate, or its happy consequences. For an integrated content management system you would definitely want this, and it would be pretty darn cool. What I disagree with is the _requirement_ to keep the two spaces separate, which burdens administrators with a lot of extra configuration, isn't understood by most content-generation software today (if any), and often confuses the end-users who can barely use Dreamweaver/Golive/FrontPage much less understand why their "browser" URL is different from their "Dreamweaver" URL. For most installations, keeping the URIs the same is a desireable thing and does not cause anyone to lose any functionality that they care about. Most people don't care about indexing their source, and we have specialized crawlers already for indexing display content. I'm just saying that the simple things should be easy. It's a basic rule of design. I'm not stuck on the GETSRC idea. I'll implement Translate almost as happily if that's the direction the group goes. If the group doesn't come up with anything at all, then Translate is likely to become the de-facto standard, and you'll end up putting it into RFC-2518-bis2 anyway. cjh --
Received on Friday, 1 March 2002 13:03:55 UTC