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

[Bug 2] Bindings needs to completely describe how bindings interact with locks.

From: <bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:16:19 -0800
Message-Id: <200412101816.iBAIGJ0Y003262@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2





------- Additional Comments From julian.reschke@greenbytes.de  2004-12-10 10:16 -------
Seems that we have settled the first of Jim's issues
(<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2004OctDec/0271.html>).

What about the second one? I'm not sure here what the issue is... Adding a new
binding to a (previously non-locked) collection binding below a depth:infinity
locked resource will cause the collection and all it's members to become part of
the lock as well. Do you feel we should include an example for this?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Received on Friday, 10 December 2004 18:16:20 UTC

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