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

RE: HOW_TO_IDENTIFY_LOCK_OWNER

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 12:01:03 -0500
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B103F8AEA6@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
No, we don't currently have standard locking privileges,
but the proposal I support is to add them.

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 10:51 AM
To: Clemm, Geoff; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Subject: RE: HOW_TO_IDENTIFY_LOCK_OWNER


> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 4:44 PM
> To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
> Subject: RE: HOW_TO_IDENTIFY_LOCK_OWNER
> 
> 
>    From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> 
>    Well, if the set of principals with the ability to unlock the
>    resource is bigger than one, why not report all of them (or a
>    subset whicht the server thinks makes sense)?
> 
> That's exactly what the DAV:acl property would do (i.e.
> the ACEs for DAV:can-unlock).

Yes,

but we don't have a standard privilege for this, right?
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2002 12:02:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:59 GMT