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

RE: Locks and loopback bindings

From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@cs.ucsc.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:00:01 -0800
Message-Id: <200412090000.iB900C74000213@cats-mx1.ucsc.edu>
To: "'WebDAV \(WebDAV WG\)'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>

Geoff Clemm writes:
	
> But with the semantics that Jim suggests, some of those members will
remain 
> mysteriously unlocked, and the editor just fails with "unexpectedly
missing 
> lock" when the user attempts to edit (or even worse, allows the user to
edit 
> an unlocked resource, without overwrite protection). 

and
	
> Surely any server 
> that is bold enough to support both binding loops and depth locking would 
> support the DAV:lockroot property introduced a while ago to solve exactly 
> this problem of not knowing where a lock comes from. 

These are good points.

That, plus the fact that I'm getting nowhere in convincing anyone else to
change the semantics of loopback bindings, leads me to concede this point.

It's now fine with me not to include any additional language in the BIND
specification about locks and lookback bindings.

- Jim
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2004 00:01:05 UTC

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