RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-dusseault-dav-quota-01.txt

> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 11:12 PM
> To: 'Clemm, Geoff'; 'WebDAV (E-mail)'
> Subject: RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-dusseault-dav-quota-01.txt
>
>
>
> All I'm suggesting we wait for is somebody who's willing to do the work
> to think through user-based quotas, and has the motivation because they
> want to implement it, and finally because a client/server pair need to
> interoperate with user-based quota information.  (Note: when I did early
> thinking about quota, we assumed we wanted user-based quota.  That
> assumption was destroyed when we really thought about different usage
> scenarios)

If everybody says that user quotas are required, and your proposal can't
adequately handle this, this should be resolved by

- either working on the proposal until it is flexible enough or

- acknowledging that it is *not* generic enough and to publish it as what it
is -- the description of one particular quota implementation (in which case
it shouldn't be "the" WebDAV quota protocol).

> For the suggestion not to use 'bytes': I'm ok with 'octets' (is there a
> difference important enough to make the change? ) but I reject the

Byte size is whatever the machine/CPU/architecture happens to use. An Octet
is 8 bits. A Byte MAY be 8 bits.

> suggestion that it should be an unmeasured unit. It's useless to know
> that the quota is 33 frobnitzes and 18 frobnitzes have been used up if
> you want to have some hint if you can upload a 1.5 Mb file.


--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 17:27:40 UTC