On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 02:16:39PM -0800, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Nov 8, 2008, at 11:15 AM, John Barham wrote:
> >>>It seems that MS is pushing webdav hard.
> >>
> >>that's what's needed when heavy things run out of fuel.
> >
> >Even as a potential substitute for ftp webdav is a farce. Speaking
> >from personal experience, the amount of XML you need to generate for a
> >directory listing is at least 20 times the size of the equivalent ftp
> >listing, and then you twiddle your thumbs waiting for the webdav
> >client to parse and render it.
it's not that bad!
# readdir in xml...
PROPREQ = array of byte "<?xml version=\"1.0\"
encoding=\"utf-8\"?><propfind xmlns=\"DAV:\"><prop><getcontentlength
xmlns=\"DAV:\"/><getlastmodified xmlns=\"DAV:\"/><executable
xmlns=\"http://apache.org/dav/props/\"/><resourcetype
xmlns=\"DAV:\"/><checked-in xmlns=\"DAV:\"/><checked-out
xmlns=\"DAV:\"/></prop></propfind>";
>
> But think about this: why would you care if you have this:
> http://noedler.de/projekte/wdfs/
>
> Why would anyone care about what's getting pushed to the
> wire?
i guess it's just us who care, since we have to implement the protocols
if we want to use them. for this case, i'm not sure what didn't stop me:
http://www.ueber.net/code/r/webdavfs
unpolished as always, but i've used it to edit files from my homedir at
my isp.
mechiel
