Subject: Re: Status of Bugzilla Bug 10, Round-tripping various information in properties

From: Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 13:04:59 -0800

On Dec 24, 2005, at 9:08 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

>>   Only an engineer would think that a generic client is an  
>> acceptable UI for browsing structured data, even if it is XML "text".
>>   Lisa and some others in CalDAV think it's useful to have  
>> meaningful resource names in CalDAV because then you can browse it  
>> with Firefox or mount it in Finder, as if my Mom wants to crack  
>> open an iCalendar resource and read it for fun.  That's OK for  
>> developers, but it's _really_ bad UI.  Never mind localization  
>> issues and the like.
>
> It may be bad UI, but that doesn't change the fact that meaningful  
> (stable) URLs are a good thing...

   Right, but "<UID>.ics" gives you stable URLs.  The ability to call  
CalDAV resources "My Birthday.ics" is what I was calling a  
misfeature, well-intentioned as it may be.

	-wsv

---

From: Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 13:10:26 -0800

On Dec 23, 2005, at 12:50 PM, Elias Sinderson wrote:
> Geoff supports the requirement but is indifferent wrt SHOULD vs. MAY.
> Lisa is OK with SHOULD, but would be fine with MAY.
> Jim is fine with SHOULD.
> Wilfredo also seems to be okay with SHOULD, as it still leaves some  
> wiggle room for server implementers.

   For the record, I'm uncomfortable with SHOULD and happy with MAY.

> It is my opinion that a MAY level requirement in this situation  
> will lead to more special casing for client writers

   It's highly unlikely that we'll implement this in mod_dav, which  
is a fairly common case, so interoperability will be an issue for  
many clients either way.

	-wsv