Re: webDAV/CalDAV client class experience ?

On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 21:26 -0600, tamouse mailing lists wrote: > On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:30 PM, B. Aerts <ba_aerts@yahoo.com> wrote: > > - the biggest mistake: apparently I commented the fwrite() call to the > > stream, which explains why he went in time-out ... (in this case, please DO > > shoot the pianist) > Nah, just don't leave a tip. :) > > - Adding the HTTP header "Accept: */*" made sure all read actions ( e.g. > > GET, PROPFIND, REPORT) worked perfectly Interesting, suprising, but it makes sense. An Accept header is required; although most things actually ignore it. > This is interesting. The Accept header has to do with what media types > the browser will accept in return. I didn't think it had anything to > do with what operations the server/application accepts. Must go read > further.... > > Only problem remaining was that PUT still isn't possible - at least not with > > one of the providers. Since I used a verbatim copy of a PUT action from the > > RFC, I strongly suspect the problem to be with the provider. > > You've no doubt considered this already, but it might be intentional > on the provider's part. I'm not up on all the webDAV/calDAV providers; > I imagine some of them might add in additional layers of auth > (including the NOWAI layer) just to consider themselves more secure. I have WebDAV/CardDAV/CalDAV experience - what actually happens when you do a PUT operation? Do you get any response at all? Is your content-type header correct? Is your payload actually correct?