There are two flaws in your judgement:
1. It does not matter if melee weapons will have (much) more durability than wands, orbs, casting weapons etc. because they will still break eventually and the later won't (not even if they have 1 durability - you don't need to actually hit anything with'em).
2. You will need to separate `caster armors` from `melee armors` based on durability also, which will pretty much suck. Which brings me to another concern...what about godly, extremely rare items with random properties...you just lose them, and that's it? It really isn't that great...
Item binding is a really great idea, at least, better than this...I really don't want (item) maintenance on my PvP chars to take most of my time...and I want to focus on finding/trading new (type of) items not the same only with higher durability.
Good points. Thx. If they have 20 durability or less u can salvaging them. Binding is far worst and annoying than destructibillity. I know this is hard to use to it. But really, Warden will not safe us for long... There must be wise system in system. Destructibillity and salvanging complement each other together. I know they can face it and do it wisely.
Even if im radical in this case... I can be lit bit more liberal. Lets say each repair u have 50% chance of loss 1 durabillity. Every single wearing item will loss dura if u choose all repair or not. Gambling sustem is beyond botters. Gambling system is fair. Better? But there must be destructibillity...