W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: Comments on bind-08

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:12:06 +0100
Message-ID: <41B0BA86.7090300@gmx.de>
To: ejw@cs.ucsc.edu
CC: "'WebDAV (WebDAV WG)'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>

Jim Whitehead wrote:
> Julian writes:
> 
> 
>>I guess we should stick with diagrams until we agree on the operation 
>>we're performing...:
> 
> 
> Yes, good point. Hmm, the figures you drew weren't quite right.
> 
> Before (this is OK, I added lock token identifiers for clarity):
> 
> +------------------+
> | Root Collection  |
> |  bindings:       |
> |  CollW           |
> +------------------+
>      |
>      |
>      |
> +-------------------------------+
> | Collection C1                 |<--------+
> | bindings:                     |         |
> | CollX               CollY     |         |
> +-------------------------------+         |
>      |                  |                 |
>      |                  |  (creates loop) |
>      |                  |                 |
> +-----------------+  +------------------+ |
> | Collection C2   |  | Collection C3    | |
> | LOCKED infinity |  | LOCKED infinity  | |
> | (lock token L2) |  | (lock token L3)  | |
> | bindings:       |  | bindings:        | |
> |  {none}         |  | y.gif     CollZ  | |
> +-----------------+  +------------------+ |
>                        |            |     |
>                        |            +-----+
>                        |
>                    +---------------------------+
>                    | Resource R2               |
>                    | (lock inhereited from C3) |
>                    | (lock token L3)           |
>                    +---------------------------+
> 
> After (this is changed -- CollZ now points to C2, not C1)
> 
> +------------------+
> | Root Collection  |
> |  bindings:       |
> |  CollW           |
> +------------------+
>      |
>      |
>      |
> +-------------------------------+
> | Collection C1                 |
> | bindings:                     |
> | CollX               CollY     |
> +-------------------------------+
>      |                  |
>      |                  |
>      |                  |
> +-----------------+  +------------------+
> | Collection C2   |  | Collection C3    |
> | LOCKED infinity |  | LOCKED infinity  |
> | (lock token L2) |  | (lock token L3)  |
> | bindings:       |  | bindings:        |
> |  {none}         |  | CollZ     y.gif  |
> +-----------------+  +------------------+
>        ^                |           |
>        +----------------+           |
>                                     |
>                    +---------------------------+
>                    | Resource R2               |
>                    | (lock inhereited from C3) |
>                    | (lock token L3)           |
>                    +---------------------------+

I guess this explains the confusion. The operation that you're showing 
here keeps the binding name (CollZ), but changes the resource to which 
it refers (from C1 to C2). This is neither a MOVE nor a REBIND operation.

You can express this as

1) UNBIND /collW/CollY/
    <unbind xmlns="DAV:">
      <segment>CollZ</segment>
    </unbind>

followed by

2) BIND /collW/CollY/
    <bind xmlns="DAV:">
      <segment>CollZ</segment>
      <href>/CollW/CollX</href>
    </bind>

The other obviously open question was whether bind loops need special 
treatment regarding depth:infinity locks. I wasn't under the impression 
they do. Is there a specific problem that needs to be solved?

Best regards, Julian

-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Friday, 3 December 2004 19:12:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:51 UTC