W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2002


From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:43:41 -0500
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B1056E1A56@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
   From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]

   > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
   > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
   > The client should never automatically reuse a lock taken out
   > by another client (irrespective of whether or not it was another
   > client with the same authentication credentials), but should only
   > steal another client's lock on explicit request by the user.
   > So the client should present to the user the information stored
   > in the DAV:owner field of the lock, and the user will use that
   > information to decide whether he/she really wants to steal that lock.

   *How* would a client present this information if the contents of
   DAV.owner is not specified at all?

The same way it presents DAV:displayname and DAV:comment information:
copying out the value of the field as a string, unless it recognizes
something about the string (e.g. some nested XML or HTML), in which
case it can massage the string first.  If we want to develop some standards
for the DAV:owner field format, that is fine with me.

Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2002 10:44:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:24 UTC