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

RE: Locks, reservations, copies and moves

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:35:27 -0700
Message-ID: <11352BDEEB92CF119F3F00805F14F485037BC210@RED-44-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>
To: "'-=jack=-'" <jack@twaxx.twaxx.com>, Dylan Barrell <dbarrell@opentext.ch>
Cc: "'WebDAV'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Oh and COPY DOES NOT replicate the lock, for the same reasons as move.
	Yaron

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	-=jack=- [SMTP:jack@twaxx.twaxx.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, August 28, 1997 10:12 AM
> To:	Dylan Barrell
> Cc:	'WebDAV'
> Subject:	Re: Locks, reservations, copies and moves
> 
> > The simplest solution seems to me to do the following
> > 
> > 1. Disallow moving of locked or reserved resources (or at least
> resource locked as part of a multi.-resource lock)
> -------------------
> [my opinion!]:  destructive operations on the *original* resource
> should be disallowed.  destructive op's on a *copy* of the orig
> resource should be allowed, unless the copy is subsequently locked...
> 
> 
> > 2. Specifically state that the correct behaviour in the case of a
> COPY is to NOT copy the locks or reservations.
> ------------
> agreed.
> 
> 
> > 3. Change the definition of MOVE to be independent of COPY
> -----------------
> definition should be independant, but implementation *could* be
> performed as described or otherwise, as long as it's transparent
> to the user...
> 
> just my $0.02...
> 
> -=j=-
> 
Received on Thursday, 28 August 1997 13:35:50 GMT

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