- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 07:50:50 -0800
- To: WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
I wish it were so easy to write short, clear specifications that could be unambiguously understood and implemented. I wish features could be orthogonal. However, bindings together with existing WebDAV features, while mostly orthogonal, have a few interesting, confusing or important interactions. This isn't an unlimited set of work, folks. All these issues have been raised before this last call period (except maybe one?) and it isn't an ever growing set. We're talking about maybe half a page of new text to clarify important interactions to implementors, and then we're done and we'll have a really good spec. Lisa On Jan 22, 2005, at 7:38 PM, Elias Sinderson wrote: > > Thanks Roy, that's an excellent point that I hadn't considered. For > the record, I am no longer opposed to the spec remaining silent on the > issue. > > > Cheers, > Elias > ________________________________ > > Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> >> On Jan 21, 2005, at 2:44 PM, Elias Sinderson wrote: >> >>>> [...] Including a single sentence which states that clients can't >>>> necessarily depend on live properties being the same on different >>>> bindings to a given resource. >>> >>> >>> ... doesn't seem like an undue amount of verbiage in the spec. >> >> >> It does to me, and I guess an explanation is in order. Let's >> say that a given live property definition does specify that its >> value must remain the same on different bindings to the same >> resource. In that case, the client can depend on them being >> the same and that simple little addition creates an unnecessary >> contradiction between what should have been orthogonal >> specifications. There is no reason for the binding specification >> to make blanket statements when there are no conditions that hold >> for all live properties -- that is why we have property definitions. >> >> Developers don't need any more guidance here. What they need are >> shorter specifications so that they don't have to waste their time >> digging through meaningless tripe just to understand the interface. >> >> ....Roy >> > >
Received on Sunday, 23 January 2005 15:51:03 UTC