- From: Brian Korver <briank@xythos.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:48:15 -0800
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Seems like good text to add. -brian briank@xythos.com On Jan 18, 2005, at 11:37 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > Ok, > > so do we have consensus to add the following subsection to section 2 > (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind- > latest.html#overview.of.bindings>)? > > > 2.x UNLOCK and Bindings > > Due to the specific language used in section 8.11 of [RFC2518], it > might be thought that an UNLOCK request to a locked resource would > unlock just the binding of the Request-URI. This is not the case, > however. Section 6 of [RFC2518] clearly states that locks are on > resources, not URIs, so the server MUST allow UNLOCK to be used to > unlock a locked resource through any binding to that resource. The > authors of this specification anticipate and recommend that future > revisions of [RFC2518] maintain this behavior. > > > Best regards, Julian > > -- > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 > >
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2005 21:48:50 UTC