Re: attn: chairs, editors - [was WebDAV properties vs. Atom extension elements]

[Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@xxxxxxx>]

My thoughts on the WebDAV question:

1. I've never really studied DAV.  I suspect that I'm in the majority.  
It would be a disadvantage if someone had to grok DAV before being able 
to implement the Atom protocol.

2. It's tough for those of us who don't already have a predisposition 
one way or another to understand the advantages/costs of the 
approaches, because it's hard to get a complete picture from the 
current patchwork of drafts and Paces.   I know I may be asking for a 
lot of work, but I suspect decisions would be a lot easier if there 
were two complete drafts we could look at "Here is the non-DAV version 
of the APP and here is the DAV version."

3. If we do some or all of the APP in a DAV-compliant way, to what 
extent does that mean that existing DAV implementations can be re-used?

4. If we do some or all of the APP in a DAV-compliant way, to what 
extent does that create expectations that Atom is a DAV application and 
you should be able to hook up a DAV client and everything will just 
work?  Put another way, it's reasonable to worry about doing custom 
subsets of widely-deployed Internet protocols.

 -Tim