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

RE: Notes from DAV meeting

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:09:47 -0700
To: "Hall, Shaun" <Shaun.Hall@gbr.xerox.com>, "Webdav WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <HPELJFCBPHIPBEJDHKGKGEELCLAA.lisa@xythos.com>

Shaun said:
> Supposing the server only supported infinite timed locks (which
> is allowed)
> and therefore lost locks through timeouts are not an issue. You've just
> bypassed the lock mechanism as we know it. In my crude example,
> what is the
> original lock creator suppose to do ?
>

If the server only supports infinite timed locks, it's also free to prevent
anybody but the original lock creator to use the associated lock token.

This proposed clarification doesn't force anything on server implementors
that they don't like.  It only makes clients have to be more robust in the
face of locks disappearing.

lisa
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2001 12:25:26 GMT

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