Re: Issue #44: REPORT_OTHER_RESOURCE_LOCKED

Good point ... it is probably simplest to leave it the way you
currently define it.

Cheers,
Geoff

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote on 06/24/2004 02:57:57 AM:

> Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:
> > 
> > This precondition sounds fine to me.
> > 
> > I wouldn't say it applies to all methods though; only methods that
> > modify state on the server (e.g., not PROPFIND or the various
> > REPORT's).
> 
> Right now it starts saying... "If a request would modify the content for 

> a locked resource, a dead property of a locked resource, a live 
> property that is defined to be lockable for a locked resource, or an 
> internal member URI of a locked collection,", thus it *does* apply to 
> all methods.
> 
> An alternative would be to re-group the conditions; but that would only 
> make case if we find more that fall into the same category...