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

Re: [Bug 23] lock discovery vs shared locks

From: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:31:02 -0500
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, webdav WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFEDFAE74C.5426901F-ON852570BD.005FDB94-852570BD.0060386D@us.ibm.com>
>From a lock privacy perspective, putting all information about the
newly created lock in the lockdiscovery response to a LOCK
request is (of course) no problem, so requiring that is fine with me.

Perhaps the new text could require that full information about a LOCK
be returned in the lockdiscovery response to a LOCK, while information
about other locks is optional in the lockdiscovery response to a LOCK.


Julian wrote on 11/18/2005 12:06:21 PM:
> Geoff, any input about how a server concerned with the privacy of lock 
> information would return the actual timeout value (as compared to the 
> one sent by the client)?
Received on Friday, 18 November 2005 17:31:01 UTC

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