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

RE: If: header and "parent" resource checking

From: Henry Harbury <Henry.Harbury@merant.com>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 13:14:50 -0700
Message-ID: <F3B2A0DB2FC1D211A511006097FFDDF501B538AB@BEAVMAIL>
To: "'Geoffrey M. Clemm'" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>, ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org, w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
I agree with Geoff - we need to respect DAV locking as best we can.
-- Henry.

-----Original Message-----
From: Geoffrey M. Clemm [mailto:geoffrey.clemm@rational.com]
Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 8:24 PM
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Subject: Re: If: header and "parent" resource checking



   From: jamsden@us.ibm.com

   What does everyone else think? Do we need locking and versioning
together?
   We're trying to make them work together, and leverage locking semantics
   whenever possible. But it hasn't been easy, and its cost us some
   flexibility.

This question has two parts:

- If you are writing a versioning client, do you care whether your
versioning server gives you any locking capability (and if so, should
it be compatible with locking defined for non-versioning servers)?

- If you are writing a versioning server, do you care that versioning
unaware locking clients work against your server?

In my case, I care about the former, to control access of multiple
clients to the same working resource, and I care about the latter,
because there are some very important versioning unaware locking clients.

Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Tuesday, 30 May 2000 16:21:14 GMT

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