- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 10:04:55 +0100
- To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
- CC: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Cullen Jennings wrote: > > I have heard that this is wanted for applications other than a file system. > Right now I was sort of looking for examples of applications that did not > want to use this. I think in this case the question needs to be rephrased: what would these clients prefer? 1) keeping the spec as is, meaning that there aren't any guarantees about this behaviour 2) changing the spec to mandate this, leading 2a) to some servers claiming to support this, but failing to do so (non-compliant implementations), or 2b) to some servers stopping to support WebDAV altogether. I'd also like to point out again that there is a class of resources that simply can't support strong ETags (for instance, WebDAV interfaces to XML-Infoset-based databases). Thinking of this, even the SHOULD that we have somewhere else in the spec is a very bad decision, and everybody should understand that this makes it impossible to maintain WebDAV interfaces to certain classes of resources (this is likely to be raised during IETF last call, so we better make sure the problem is understood). Best regards, Julian
Received on Saturday, 26 November 2005 09:06:09 UTC