- From: CJ Holmes <cholmes@4d.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 17:00:44 -0800
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > Call it DAV-Enabled. The value must be present but is ignored. (If >> someone got ambitious it could be used by the client to indicate its > > capabilities. But one problem at a time, OK?) >> >It doesn't change the issue that you'd be using the same URI for different >resources. That's a very basic problem, and no amount of syntactic sugar >makes it go away. Yeah, but it's OUR problem, and not yours. If our DAV implementation is unsatisfactory to our customers then we have to change it. But this would let us (and other implementors) give our customers what they want, which is DAV access to their source files with virtually no configuration necessary. All we need from the protocol group is a sure way to know that a GET command originated from a DAV client. Is that so much to ask? cjh --
Received on Friday, 1 March 2002 20:00:50 UTC