- From: Jay Daley <jay@nominet.org.uk>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:44:11 +0000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, werner.donne@re.be
> I think the important point is that having different protocol handlers > may be the wrong way to approach that problem. Here are some concrete examples of why having a separate protocol handler would help: 1. Suppose a new browser comes out that is super-fast and I decide to use it as my standard browser and so my OS is set to use this as the default browser. However this browser does not support WebDAV. I then receive an email with a link to a collection on a WebDAV enabled server, that has the form http://.... So I click on the link and my browser does what it can but that is no use to me since I need the WebDAV compliance. I then have to cut and paste the URL into a WebDAV compliant application and access it that way. The alternative is that the link arrives in the form webdav://.... So my OS now has two defaults set up, one for the default browser and one for the default WebDAV application. I have only changed the former when I installed my new browser so clicking on the link still invokes my WebDAV application and it all works. 2. Suppose I am a fairly technical IT person, who has never heard of WebDAV. I receive an email with a link to a WebDAV compliant resource that is of the form http://.... Well I am none the wiser. I don't know this is a WebDAV server, I don't know that I could do so much more than just retrieve the document. In fact if I receive a "Forbidden to access" error then I might believe the whole thing is broken. However, suppose I receive an email with a link of the form webdav://.... Well I realise I don't know what this is so I go and learn about it. I download a WebDAV compliant app, or I discover that some of my apps are already WebDAV compliant. I even start to think about how I might use WebDAV inside my company. The insistence on the http:// scheme means that WebDAV is *invisible*. After a decade it is probably less well know than something like ENUM. I would suggest that the use of the http:// scheme is one of the biggest factors in contributing to this invisibility. Jay Daley Nominet UK
Received on Wednesday, 17 January 2007 11:44:26 UTC