- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@apache.org>
- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 02:58:34 -0800
- To: CJ Holmes <cholmes@4d.com>
- Cc: DAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> No, I don't agree that this is a problem. In most cases it is the > _desired_ effect because users generally only use DAV for messing > with their source, and they don't care about using DAV with the > output. But they _do_ want to use the same URLs for both editing > source and viewing output. If the administrator wants something > different he should be able to configure his server accordingly. You are saying that the protocol should have a one-to-one correspondence with the way that a client application presents information to the user. I am saying that the protocol must be unabiguous and compatible with HTTP/1.1, but that doesn't stop the client from presenting it to the user as if they were the same resource. The only difference is the URL, which is something an authoring client can and will present to the user in a way that is meaningful to that user. DAV is the access mechanism, not the user interface. ....Roy
Received on Friday, 8 March 2002 06:03:44 UTC