[PATCH]

[Evan Miller]

Igor Sysoev <is at ...> writes:

> On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 08:25:02AM +0000, Evan Miller wrote:
> 
> > Igor Sysoev <is <at> ...> writes:
> > 
> > > Thank you for your patch, however, I do not see any practical use of the
> > > "Allow" header line. Yes, it must be set according to HTTP/1.1, but is
> > > there any client that can use this information ?
> > 
> > I needed it (and wrote the patch) when I was using davfs, a WebDAV client.
> > Other
> > WebDAV clients might also use it, but I'm not sure. That being said, I don't
> > actually need the functionality now, but I figured someone else might, and
> > standards compliance seems like a good goal.
> 
> So, webfs uses this header ? How ?
> 

IIRC, davfs looks for this header when it issues the OPTIONS method. However,
the client I was using also required other headers in the OPTIONS response,
including a "DAV" header (see
http://www.webdav.org/specs/rfc2518.html#HEADER_DAV), but I lost interest before
implementing those properly.

I honestly can't think of a compelling use-case aside from that, so for me it's
just a question of standards-compliance. I'm a bit conflicted when it comes to
standards; the do give clients predictability about the server's features, but
some of the requirements (such as this one) don't add much value. My feeling is
that if it's simple to do, you might as well support the standard; otherwise,
don't bother. Here it was simple.

Evan