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

> > Yah.  That's a toughie.  It lists things that are both important to the
> > binding spec and the base 2518 spec.  But it also apparently
> > covers things that are outside the realm of each of these specs.
> > It might need to be submitted as a seperate document that clarifies
> > (and "unifies") both specs after they come out.
>
> Again strong disagreement.
Is it ever not "strong"? :-)

> Each of the paragraphs in GULP is needed to correctly explain RFC2518
> locking semantics. If you think there's something which *isn't* needed
for
> RFC2518, please point to it :-)

I step back from what I said.  I think it is possible to put the current
GULP
document in 2518bis.


------------------------------------------
Phone: 914-784-7569,   ccjason@us.ibm.com
I do not check nn621779@smallcue.com