W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 2001

RE: rfc2818 issue: UNLOCK_BY_NON_LOCK_OWNER

From: Tim Ellison <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 10:38:10 +0100
To: "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF988E456A.54A9EFB1-ON80256A8B.0034BFB8@portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>

I agree with Lisa.

Lisa wrote:
> Well, since I was the one who brought it up, here are
> my thoughts.
>
> It seems not entirely unreasonable to have a system
> where the resource owner can remove locks on their
> resource, even locks that the resource owner did not
> create.  With ACLs in the mix, this makes even more
> sense.  After all, if somebody has the ability to
> grant permission whether or not somebody can lock a
> resource, they might as well have the ability to remove
> locks.
>
> To the client that had their lock disappear, it's just
> like the lock expired.  They can try to get another.
> There may be changes they may have to merge.
>
> Now it doesn't have to be the resource owner that can
> do this.  It can be entirely up to the implementation
> or the lock policy.  This is made nicely possible in
> WebDAV because it makes the locktoken available for
> anybody to use to try to UNLOCK the resource.  It just
> leaves it up to the implementation whether or not to
> allow this to succeed.
Received on Monday, 16 July 2001 06:11:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:56 GMT