Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The distinction between being a "real CardDAV server" and being a server that exposes CardDAV is undefined and irrelevant, possibly non-existent. There is a spec, and if you implement it, you have a server that implements that spec. That's it.

You can of course deviate from certain parts of the spec... dropping unknown fields as you mentioned might be a reasonable tradeoff. But then that deviation has to be documented. It isn't.

You're completely leaving out the other issues that the author describes: Timing out TCP sessions, discarding UIDs. Both things are not reasonable design choices in any world. And then the response to bug reports.



I am not sure what you mean by 'the deviation has to be documented.'

Has to be documented in order to do what? To claim to be standards compliant? Do they ever make that claim?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: