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

Re: Change to Lock-Token

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 15:14:36 -0800
To: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <9703281514.aa26138@paris.ics.uci.edu>
>I was never arguing that lock tokens should be entity tags. What I was
>arguing for was that the format of a lock token should be the same as an
>entity tag. This would have, I thought, given us the benefit of being
>able to use lock tokens in if-match headers and thus be able to say
>things like "Don't execute this message unless my lock still exists."

But that would assume that the lock token is the entity tag, because
the server wouldn't be able to continue the operation if it wasn't.

>However Roy pointed out that this behavior is illegal. That the HTTP WG,
>against his vociferous recommendations, decided to make the if-match
>header only available for e-tags.

Just to clarify, what I said is that the HTTP-WG decided to go with
separate header fields for every conditional, rather than a single
field with a well-defined grammar like

    IF: {eq {Lock "the thing Yaron wanted"}}

which would allow any number of preconditions and be extensible.
Thus, you will need to define

    If-Lock: "the thing Yaron wanted"

instead, which, in my considered technichal opinion, sucks.

.....Roy
Received on Friday, 28 March 1997 18:37:40 GMT

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