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

RE: rfc2518 issue: DEFER_LOCK_NULL_RESOURCES_IN_SPEC

From: Jason Crawford <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 15:11:56 -0400
To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>
Cc: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@Rational.Com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF65E1E054.73C9C127-ON85256AA3.0069110F@pok.ibm.com>



It sounds like we all agree with Geoff's wording.

Lisa did make an interesting observation below though.

<<
This means that LOCK can return 201, which is important to distingusih
between LOCK of an unmapped URL (I can go ahead and put my content) and
LOCK
of URL that somebody else just created (I should NOT send my content before
checking).
>>

Do we want to enhance Geoff's explanation or add a comment along the lines
of Lisa's observation?   Or just make sure we mention 201 where we list
potential error codes for LOCK requests?

J.
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2001 15:28:26 GMT

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