Am Freitag, den 19.10.2007, 11:42 +0200 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz: > On 10/19/07, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ...I would > > say, that we should not mix microsling/Sling generation and WebDAV > > generation as it will never correctly workout, unfortunately.... > > Why wouldn't that work?
Because a WebDAV GET is not the same as a microsling/Sling GET in the general case. > I agree that mixing WebDAV and other protocols in the same URL space > might not work depending on what the other protocols are, but what > could go wrong in the simple microsling case? Just having to explain: A request is passed through Sling Servlet resolutions unless the RequestURL exactly matches the JCR resource in which case the request is handled as if it were a WebDAV request ... This calls for nasty problems and hard to explain special cases. > > I'm curious mostly, I cannot argue 100% that it would work, so if you > have contrary evidence it'd help me figure out the issues. > > Having a full WebDAV implementation (the Jackrabbit one I assume) > *plus* our cool resource resolving and scripting stuff in the same URI > space sounds like a big benefit for microsling...there might be > downsides, but I'd prefer us to analyze them before dismissing the > idea. With the exception that it does not work. We (Day) tried this in other products (Communiqué for concrete) and always came to the conclusion, that we have to clearly separate WebDAV from the rest. So in Communiqué we solved the issue of just prefixing WebDAV requests such that http://host/dav/xxx/yyy would be a WebDAV request to resource /xxx/yyy while http://host/xxx/yyy would be the "normal" request to resource /xxx/yyy. And as always: Keeping things simple means: Don't create special cases ... Regards Felix
