RE: Locking, moving and deleting

   From: Stefan Eissing [mailto:stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de]

   RFC 2518 Ch. 6 says:
     "The ability to lock a resource provides a mechanism for
      serializing access to that resource. Using a lock, an authoring
      client can provide a reasonable guarantuee that another
      principal will not modify a resource while it is being
      edited..."

   This gave me the impression that locks are on a resource and not
   on one particular URL of that resource.

The purpose of a lock is serializing access to a resource,
but that is not incompatible with saying "the lock is on a URI
and controls access to the resource mapped to that URI".

   I agree that multiple URL and deep locks on collections provide
   some interesting challenges to define consistent behaviour. But
   I find it a little bit hard to give up the assumption
      locking resource == locking resource content + properties

   So, maybe I have misunderstood this thread?

You just need to expand your equivalence as follows:

locking resource == locking URL == locking resource mapped to that URL.

Cheers,
Geoff