- From: Dave Winer <dave@userland.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 10:20:00 -0800
- To: "Mark Baker" <mark.baker@Canada.Sun.COM>
- Cc: "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
I've read that spec, have you read mine? http://www.xmlrpc.com/stories/storyReader$700 Sure we could somehow layer what we do on top of that, but that's what we already do. Content management is different from file replication. More links here: http://dave.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$93 Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Baker" <mark.baker@Canada.Sun.COM> To: "Dave Winer" <dave@userland.com> Cc: "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>; <xml-dist-app@w3.org> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 10:01 AM Subject: Re: The Two Way Web > Hi again Dave, > > I didn't want to let this thread die. There's an extremely important > issue that Dan has raised; what exactly is wrong with HTTP 1.1 for > the Two Way Web? > > I'd ask this question to Ken too - what's wrong with HTTP 1.1? > DWC includes getMessages() and postMessage() which appear to be > similar to HTTP GET and POST at a first glance. Have you seen DRP? > It would appear to be a tool that could help you rearchitect DWhite > to be more document-centric, and it doesn't use any unexpected HTTP > extensions (it uses a new header, but in a completely supported way). > > http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-drp-19970825.html > > MB > > Dave Winer wrote: > > > > Hi Mark! > > > > For a browser-based web content system, you do not need any kind of RPC. We > > use HTML forms with textareas in Manila, just like Wiki. > > > > There's a lot of info about Manila on the web, the RPC interface, > > marketing/positioning materials, even a site where you can create your own > > Manila site to experiment with. We've started over 3000 new sites in the > > last couple of months, our users are very excited about where it's going. As > > I said in the piece later this month we'll release a desktop writing tool > > for Windows/Mac that hooks into the RPC interfaces, imho, the first true > > network-centered writing tool that isn't a web browser. > > > > But I don't want to just hurl URLs at you guys. One step at a time.. > > > > About WebDAV, that's a FAQ. I don't like WebDAV. I don't know many other > > people who do. Nice way to do websites if you're a Word user who doesn't > > want to dive into the Web. That's not my market. (I can already feel the > > flames coming at me. Hi Alex!) > > > > Dave >
Received on Friday, 10 March 2000 13:19:53 UTC