STOP THIS! A similar section has been in here some time ago, for good reasons.
It has? Where? At least on the WebDAV page, where I would think most people would look for WebDAV software (why I put it there), before that there was just 1 client for this protocol listed (when in fact there are at least a dozen), and saying it was full of bugs. Do you want people to think WebDAV is trash?
(feel free to contact me directly for further discussion))
Of course. That was hours of work you just removed. All which I carefully reviewed & double-checked. So, naturally, why did you do it? Remove essentially all of my additions?
- Removing all the organizations and people contributing Clients and Servers to for this protocol (WebDAV), which any one who wants to use the protocol needs to get? -- Can't use it without it. (Moreover, you even removing the information on the Windows client which was there before?)
- And removing the additional External Links I added (there are others, as www.greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/ - are they not allowed to contribute to the WebDAV discussion as well? Under "WebDav They are #2 in Google.)
Do you want people to abandon this protocol? They will,
- if it looks like there is no clients to choose from?
- If there is no active discussion on it, which links such as this www.greenbytes.de/tech/webdav provide (updated a few days ago, as opposed to the existing www.WebDAV.Org link (only one you allowed) which hasn't been updated in about 2 months, so much that one of the WebDAV client developers just said he thought it was getting pretty dead)
What are you trying to accomplish?
- Other wikipedia pages are full of neutral product listings & comparisons - some even construct tables to compare -- you totally delete the product listings for this protocol (I gave 10); when related wikipages pages not only list theirs they list even more (CIFS lists 15 Alternative versions and implementations, and CMS lists over 100);
- And this stuff isn't on the existing www.WebDAV.Org/project page (which you restore as the source) even though that page was "Last modified: Thu Apr 3 14:22:30 MST 2003" (3 years ago!)
So, yes, please clue me in.
First of all, your changes are not lost. They can easily restored, it's all in the history of the page.
Second, the page had a similar list some time ago, and it was removed. See discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:WebDAV#Long_lists_of_software. I'm sort of neutral on that issue, but should people agree that a product list is a good idea, it probably should be based on the original list. I also would recommend that you discuss this with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JonHarder before.
Wikipedia is not a replacement for Google. As you said, if Google lists a WebDAV-related page on rank #2, that's a sign it doesn't need to be mentioned over here.
If you want an up-to-date product list on the Web, I recommend that you publish that yourself.
Reschke 09:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Pascal64: (a) not everything that uses HTTP is "cloud computing". And (b), more importantly, we simply do not list all clients, servers, or services. There are too many. It's not what the article about WebDAV is for. --Reschke (talk) 09:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Please, do not remove correct attribution for CalDAV to Apple, Oracle and CommerceNet as this is important in the present Microsoft vs. Google case about ActiveSync protocol. You may extend the section though IMHO. --Milan Kerslager (talk) 12:28, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Milan: contributors to IETF specs are people, not corpotations.