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

RE: refresh LOCK for multiple locks

From: <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 14:54:22 -0500
To: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <85256835.006D514C.00@D51MTA03.pok.ibm.com>


  If you mean locks implied by a Tagged-List in the If: header, then that
  just doesn't make sense :-)

That's what I meant.  I don't know if it makes sense or not, but I'm
perfectly willing to say that "it" is not supported.


And I agree that it seems somewhat odd that we use the IF header to
determine
what locks are to be refreshed.  I would think this should work just as
UNLOCK
does.  That's not to say people can't use an IF header, but that's not how
they specify which of the locks is to be refreshed.  The IF header would
only
be for consistancy checking if the client wanted the refresh to be
contingent
on the presence of a specified lock on some specified resource.

Now I also recognize that changing this might break some clients/servers.
Before we could change this,
we'd have to come to a consensus that we're willing to change our
implementations.

J.
Received on Friday, 26 November 1999 14:54:46 GMT

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