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

Re: Last call: range locking

From: Ron Daniel Jr. <rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 08:41:47 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970304084129.0098f270@acl.lanl.gov>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
At 03:25 AM 3/4/97 PST, Larry Masinter wrote:
>> 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".

I agree with Larry on this. If we can do locks based on URIs, then
we have the ability to identify the resource that is bytes n..m of
some other resource and lock it. Maybe I've just missed them, but I
haven't seen any real arguments on why this is insufficient and why
the only good way to implement this functionality is to make it a part
of some special protocol, such as a new LOCKRANGE method for HTTP.

Regards,

Ron Daniel Jr.              voice:+1 505 665 0597
Advanced Computing Lab        fax:+1 505 665 4939
MS B287                     email:rdaniel@lanl.gov
Los Alamos National Lab      http://www.acl.lanl.gov/~rdaniel
Los Alamos, NM, USA, 87545  
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 1997 10:42:30 GMT

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