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

Re: UNLOCK from the middle of a locked tree

From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 01:46:30 -0800 (PST)
To: "Slein, Judith A" <JSlein@crt.xerox.com>
cc: "'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, "Hall, Shaun" <Shaun.Hall@GBR.XEROX.COM>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003110145440.1133-100000@nebula.lyra.org>
FYI, mod_dav removes all the locks. e.g option (a) was our interpretation

Cheers,
-g

On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Slein, Judith A wrote:

> I have this question from a product team in my company.  Any opinions?  I
> would say that (b) is not an option, but failing the unlock request might
> be.
> 
> --Judy
> 
> Section 8.11 UNLOCK Method. The first sentence states "...and all other
> resources included in the lock". Does this mean that a client should only
> Unlock from the point where the lock starts? For example, in a hierarchy:
> 
> 		Collection 1
> 		|	  |
> 	    Collection 2	Collection 3
> 		|	  |
> 	    Resource 4	Resource 5
> 
> If the lock was created with a Depth of infinity on "Collection 1", should
> the user only perform the UNLOCK on "Collection 1"?
> 
> We're concerned that a client may try and unlock from a sub-point within the
> hierarchy eg UNLOCK "Collection 2", which means to meet the first sentence
> in the RFC, we either:
> 
> a) Have to traverse the entire hierarchy (parents and all) removing the lock
> from all resources (in the above example, "Collection 1", "Collection 3" and
> "File 5").
> 
> b) Only remove the lock from "Collection 2" and "File 4".
> 

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Saturday, 11 March 2000 04:43:16 GMT

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