4 ms·
I myself use DAVx^5 with NextCloud for many years and it works fine. But having written quite a bit of client code for CalDAV, let me tell you these are really
by deng 7y ago
I myself use DAVx^5 with NextCloud for many years and it works fine. But having written quite a bit of client code for CalDAV, let me tell you these are really arcane protocols in dire need of replacement. It's really no fun at all, and I wish "we all" could move to something a bit more modern (which essentially means: something more RESTy). I have no idea how this could work, though...
- pferde 7y agohttps://jmap.io/spec.html https://jmap.io/spec.html perhaps?
- deng 7y agoYes, I really hope that JMAP succeeds and applaud Fastmail for taking this on. The problem of course is that there's a huge drag in getting new protocols like these established. One problem is that Fastmail works with Cyrus, but Dovecot seems to be much more popular nowadays. Of course, getting a new protocol into Dovecot is a pretty big undertaking, but I hope they will eventually find the time to do this.
- mercutio2 7y agoWebDAV is about as RESTy as you’re likely to ever see. Collections containing different resources, different behaviors based on ContentType, extensible to allow different types of data. Behavior and state determined by hypertext. Usually when people say they don’t like CalDAV or CardDAV, they mean they don’t like XML, non-GET verbs, and Versit Consortium syntax (none of which are in conflict with REST)? I’ll admit Versit syntax, with it’s significant whitespace, among other warts, is a bit of a pain. JMAP is really the same data model as CardDAV and CalDAV, just with different encodings of everything, if that’s what you want.