W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2003

RE: Bindings and Locks (was: bind draft issues)

From: Jason Crawford <nn683849@smallcue.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:35:21 -0500
To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@Rational.Com>
Cc: WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF801B9C87.420ED413-ON05256CDE.0076632B@us.ibm.com>




On Monday, 03/03/2003 at 04:24 EST, "Clemm, Geoff"
<nngclemm___at___Rational.Com@smallcue.com> wrote:
> Good point!
>
> I assume by "the binding being protected", you mean in the
> case where the binding already exists, and the Overwrite:T
> header is specifed?  If so, I agree that we need another
> precondition to handle this.  How about:
>
> (DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed): If the collection already contains a
binding
> with the specified path segment, and if that binding is protected by a
> write-lock, then the appropriate token MUST be specified in an If request
> header.

I suppose that covers it.  Hopefully the reader understands the situations
that
that covers.

One question though... does it have to be a write-lock?  I suspect
this precondition even applies to non-write locks.
Received on Monday, 3 March 2003 16:36:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:02 GMT