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

RE: BIND: precondition DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 11:53:27 +0200
To: "Nevermann, Dr., Peter" <Peter.Nevermann@softwareag.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCEEPMIAAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Nevermann, Dr., Peter
> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 5:24 PM
> To: 'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'
> Subject: BIND: precondition DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed
>
>
> Some time ago, I asked what status code should a BIND request
> return, if the
> precondition
> DAV:locked-update-allowed is violated. Apparently, there has been
> consensus
> in that is should be:
> 423 "Locked" with <D:error><D:locked-update-allowed/></error> in the
> response-body
> What if DAV:locked-overwrite-allowed is violated? It could be:
> 1) 423 "Locked" with <D:error><D:locked-overwrite-allowed/></error> in the
> response-body
> 2) 409 "Conflict" with
> <D:error><D:locked-overwrite-allowed/></error> in the
> response-body
> Isn't 2) more reasonable in this case, because this time it is not the
> resource identified by the request URI which is locked?

Agreed.

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Monday, 4 August 2003 05:53:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:04 GMT