RE: error condition for delete of VHR when VCR is in checked-in c ollection

> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 2:05 PM
> To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: RE: error condition for delete of VHR when VCR is in checked-in
> c ollection
> 
> ..
>    In case b), there's no way a subsequent CHECKIN or CHECKOUT can
>    satisfy RFC3253's postconditions, so I'd consider this a broken
>    state. There shouldn't be a protocol-tolerated way to get into this
>    state, right?
> 
> Which CHECKOUT/CHECKIN postconditions couldn't be satisfied?
> I do agree that some operations could not succeed (e.g. UNCHECKOUT).

You are right. CHECKIN/CHECKOUT would continue to work.