Re: Call for consensus on UNLOCK Request-URI being lock root

Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:

> [...] the issue being discussed is just whether or not the refresh of 
> the lock has to be applied to the URL of the root of the lock, or 
> whether it can be applied to the URL of an indirectly locked resource 
> and then be automatically redirected by the server to the URL of the 
> root of the lock. 

Ah, thanks, I had indeed misunderstood the specific issue (while 
frantically trying to catch up on my email). So, in that case, I think I 
would still prefer option 1, given the evidence of current 
implementation behaviour. I'll try to read more carefully in the 
future...  ;-)

Cheers,
Elias