W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 1999

Re: Write Locks on Collections

From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 13:41:32 -0800 (PST)
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9911231337521.10639-100000@nebula.lyra.org>
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Geoffrey M. Clemm wrote:
>    From: Kevin Wiggen <wiggs@xythos.com>
>...
>    Re 7.5
> 
>    A write lock on a collection, whether created by a "Depth: 0" or "Depth:
>    infinity" lock request, prevents the addition or removal of member URIs of
>    the collection by non-lock owners.
> 
> I believe it says "internal member".

Nope. It just says "member".

>    If a lock owner causes the URI of a resource to be added as an internal
>    member URI of a locked collection then the new resource MUST be
>    automatically added to the lock.
> 
> I believe this statement should only apply to non-Depth:0 locks.
> Otherwise, this results in the inability to independently lock
> a collection and members of the collection.  This should be clarified/fixed
> in the next draft of 2518.

I completely agree.

>    What does this mean when a collection is locked via a Depth 0 lock:
> 
>    1)  When a new resource is added to the collection, the resource is added
>    without a lock as the parent has only a Depth 0 lock.
> 
> That's what I believe it should mean.

Same here. mod_dav implements collection locks this way.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Tuesday, 23 November 1999 16:41:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:52 GMT