Re: WebDAV properties vs. Atom extension elements

[Robert Sayre <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It's not really the same issue at all. Of course you can put extensions in an
entry element if you want. It has nothing to do with template wrapper, either.
They don't need a wrapper any more than jpeg files do.

If we're not going to use WebDAV resource defintions and methods, we should come
up with technical arguments against reuse. I don't see any technical arguments.
First of all, we should stop referring to WebDAV as a monolith. We're free to
take the things that we find useful, as PaceOrderedCollections does.

Robert Sayre

Quoting Joe Gregorio <joe.gregorio@xxxxxxxxx>:

>
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:06:35 -0800, Ezra Cooper <ezra@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > To put it concisely, I want it to be the case that WebDAV is not
> > required for Atom. It's already been agreed that WebDAV should not be
> > required for core Atom capabilities. Can we improve that and say that
> > WebDAV is not required for core Atom, and not for Atom extensions
> > either?
>
> +1
>
> The idea of Atom was that the protocol used the syndication format as
> it's basis and thus  the extensibility of the syndication format would
> flow into the protocol.
>
>     -joe
>
> --
> Joe Gregorio        http://bitworking.org
>
>