hi daniel agreed on the basics. however, i would not want to push the jackrabbit/webdav part too early (and not before its well established).
regarding your example: i don't see any benefit of having 'jackrabbit' there. the focus should remain on webDAV against jsr170 (and its successor jsr283).
We could provide two different impls of the api for jackrabbit, one for client side access and one for server side access. Once the api is implemented the webdav-servlet can be used to access jackrabbit using the webdav protocol.
if i'm getting you right this is what we called the remoting of jsr170 via webdav). from my experience i'd say this is a different story than a generic webdav implementation (or whatever you want to call it) and this is one of reasons to suggest a split of the current 'jcr-server' project. jsr170 matches quite well to the rfc 2518 and its extensions but not completely. on the other hand there is quite some additional functionality in the webdav rfc that has not correspondence within jsr170 (some will probably be addressed with jsr283). regards angela
