W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 1997

Re: range locking not used in GroupWise

From: Steve Carter <SRCarter@GW.NOVELL.COM>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 17:40:15 -0700
Message-Id: <s3132424.099@GW.NOVELL.COM>
To: masinter@parc.xerox.com, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
You are right, the protocol does not need to deal with the range lock.
If needed it can be performed at the resource level. If a DMS manages
documents via a database then the resource name becomes the
access name for the document.

I believe we are no longer at cross purposes.

-src


>>> Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com> 02/25/97 07:51AM >>>
Steve,

You keep on talking about function, and I'm talking about protocol.
The issue isn't whether the function needs to get exposed, the
issue is whether the protocol needs to be aware of it. I don't
see any good reason why the protocol needs to get more complicated
to deal with "byte range locking" when "resource locking" covers
it, because a "byte range" can be a "resource".

Is there really a disagreement, or are we just talking at cross
purposes?

Larry
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 1997 19:41:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:42 GMT