- From: Werner Baumann <werner.baumann@onlinehome.de>
- Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 11:14:38 +0200
- CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Petr Tomasek wrote: > On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 06:13:54PM +0200, Werner Baumann wrote: >> What the hell is a "read-only WebDAV implementation"? WebD*A*V is about >> *Authoring*. > > Sorry, but this is silly! According to such an interpretation one > couldn't use e.g. the HTTP protocol for anything else, than a hypertext! > > Rather, the WebDAV is most commonly used as a network filesystem > implemented over HTTP and as such it makes much sense to have > a read-only filesystem. > WebDAV is not a network file-system and never was intended to be. Please read the documents, e.g. ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2291.txt and ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4918.txt I am maintaining a WebDAV-file-system (davfs2, which is not a network file-system but an intermediate solution for authoring tools without built-in WebDAV-support). My experience with this work tells me: It is impossible to cleanly map WebDAV-resources into a Unix-file-system. Though I am not really happy with RFC 4918, this point is not the fault of the specification, because it was never intended for this use. It has become common practice, to reuse existing protocols for new applications. That's OK. But when it turns out, that the chosen protocol does not really meet the requirements of this application, there is the bad habit of tweaking the original protocol, up to the point where it gets unusable for its original intention. This must stop. "preaching to the choir" again Werner
Received on Sunday, 25 May 2008 09:15:29 UTC