Re: WebDAV effeciancy

Lisa Dusseault wrote:

> Bita,
>
> What do you mean by comparing the HTTP functionality to the WebDAV
> functionality?  WebDAV extends HTTP in order to do proper authoring, so
> there is no real functionality comparison based on authoring.  HTTP doesn't
> do the authoring functions that WebDAV adds, that's why WebDAV had to add
> these fucntions.
>
> Since WebDAV extends HTTP:
>  - they both have exactly the same theoretical speed/flexibility
> capabilities for downloading documents and uploading documents (these are
> the most common HTTP actions that are also common WebDAV actions)
>  - they have exactly the same security features
>
> One could imagine doing performance comparisons between WebDAV functionality
> and, for example, the Microsoft FrontPage extensions which do many of the
> same functions.  Or one could compare a WebDAV authoring site to a site
> using HTML forms for authoring (like Yahoo PageWizards).
>
> Perhaps I've misunderstood your question.
>
> Lisa

Lisa,

I haven't expressed my question correctly - sorry. By WebDAV and HTTP, in fact
I meant comparing the process of communication between the WebDAV servers and
clients compare to the HTTP ones.

I agree with you that WebDAV is an extension on HTTP and provide all
functionality of the HTTP, added some new functionality regarding the metadata,
access control, locking and so on. However, since there is more processing for
those new functionality in environment based on the WebDAV protocol, I am
wondering how much this would effect on the speed. Also many functionality of
the WebDAV can be implemented by HTTP POST method, Soap and so on ( as you
mentioned like Microsoft FrontPage). So if the security is the same and if the
speed may be low (not sure), why would the user choose WebDAV rather HTTP?

Thanks,
Bita.

Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2003 16:16:55 UTC