W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: Puzzle: DELETE of a locked collection

From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:18:59 -0700 (PDT)
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10004131301370.9703-100000@nebula.lyra.org>
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Geoffrey M. Clemm wrote:
>...
> The answer I'd like us to make is that you can include an arbitrary
> number of Lock-Token headers with a request, and this defines the
> lock token list for your request (no If header required).

Agreed.

Go one step further, then: if you do not use IF: to specify lock tokens,
it is only good for etags. If that is the case, then we have If-Match in
HTTP/1.1. Why keep the IF: header? :-)

> Until then, as far as I can tell, 2518 requires Greg to do the
> obviously non-scalable insertion of a tagged list for *every* member
> of the collection being moved in the If header.

Based on feedback from some people on the dav-dev mailing list, I'm going
to do the following:

*) if a tagged-list state-list specifies a URL and its locktoken, then the
   state-list will be applied to the internal members (to the extend of
   the lock depth). this will effectively replicate the state list down to
   all affected members.
   (any existing tagged-list for an internal member will override this
    implied state-list)

This should solve the problem, even if it isn't "strictly" by-the-book. I
have no idea how hard this will be, but I'll dig in and try it...

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Thursday, 13 April 2000 16:13:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:54 GMT