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

RE: bind draft issues

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 09:45:32 +0100
To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, "'Clemm, Geoff'" <gclemm@rational.com>, "'WebDAV'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCIEEKGKAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 4:40 AM
> To: 'Clemm, Geoff'; 'WebDAV'
> Subject: RE: bind draft issues
>
>
>
>
> > RFC2518bis is in the process of finalizing the behavior of
> > locks, and we do not want the bind draft to say anything that
> > conflicts with this.  Instead, we will make sure that the
> > locking model in RFC2518bis clearly defines locking behavior
> > in the presence of multiple bindings.
>
> I don't think that's a reasonable expectation of RFC2518bis.  The
> bindings draft has to be clear in how it deals with locks -- RFC2518bis
> will not discuss bindings.

I thought we had agreement that GULP is the currently best approach of
explaining the WebDAV locking model. GULP also covers binds (implicitly!)
and therefore either should be added to RFC2518bis, or be the basis for a
rewrite:

<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0064.html>



--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2003 03:45:41 GMT

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