W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: [Bug 23] lock discovery vs shared locks

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:05:39 -0700
Message-Id: <f738ece3885e7dbffa9386e7fca9a07f@osafoundation.org>
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On Oct 29, 2005, at 8:58 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>> ...
>> Ok, I understand now why the lockdiscovery property is unreliable for 
>> this purpose.  But what about the body of the LOCK response (in 
>> addition to the Lock-Token header)?
> It's the same: 
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2518.html#rfc.section.8.10.1>:
> "The response MUST contain the value of the lockdiscovery property in 
> a prop XML element."
> Best regards, Julian
Yes, and MUST the lock token appear in that context? This is important 
because some clients pull the lock token value from the body of the 
request.  When we tested this in interop testing, we found some clients 
used the body and some used the header, and we had decided at that 
point to allow that to continue happening and make servers put the 
token in both places.

Received on Saturday, 29 October 2005 16:05:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:33 UTC