- From: Sergey Ponomarev <stokito@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2023 20:13:00 +0300
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "w3c-dist-auth@w3.org" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADR0UcUG2oPVv=T6ZULAf682=UFVjw=n-uc=KkttRhoM37_3fg@mail.gmail.com>
Thank you, Julian, So there is no official protocol schema. But unofficially the dav:// and davs:// become more supported e.g. in GNOME Files (Nautilus) and soon in KDE Dolphin. I also created a ticket for Nautilus to support the webdav:// schema just because users may not remember a proper schema. But it may take a lot of time for them to implement. Interestingly, just the http:// should also work for Gnome Files but it looks broken. Windows mount works only by the http:// It's a good question if the separate protocol schema is needed. Even if a user clicks on the http:// link the browser itself may try to detect the dav folder and render it as a folder. Still having an explicit protocol would be better. So you add it somewhere in spec or somehow confirm that you are fine with usage of dav:// and davs:// as a schema? Speaking about some header added to all GET request to let know about ability to watch the folder as dav. We have few options: 1. DAV header. It would be easier to implement because it's already added for OPTIONS. It can be big for SVN or something like that but this is a rare case and anyway HTTP2 HPACK should solve the problem. 2. Link is less obvious and not described in the dav spec so it needs for more work. 3. Alt-Svc is also something that may be used. Not sure if this would be a proper usage. The preferable view as webpage or as a webdav may be an overcomplication. Maybe user's browser have a dav less useful that automatically generated directory listing. Most time I expect oposite. Here a browser can show a button on top of the page and propose to a user to decide and remember it's choise. This would be a simplest solution and if needed we may back to this on future. Read only view also doesn't have a good solution so let's keep it out of the scope. Only ACL or sonething like that can solve the problem. So to summarize: does anyone have any ideas or concerns about using the DAV header on GET requests? If no then I'll implement it in my browser extension and I'll ask existing servers to add the header. Please vote with + or - Thank you -- Sergey Ponomarev <https://linkedin.com/in/stokito>, stokito.com
Received on Sunday, 26 March 2023 17:13:17 UTC