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

[Bug 23] lock discovery vs shared locks

From: <bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 01:56:17 -0800
Message-Id: <200511190956.jAJ9uHAH020415@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23

julian.reschke@greenbytes.de changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Version|-07                         |-08



------- Additional Comments From julian.reschke@greenbytes.de  2005-11-19 01:56 -------
Draft 08 URL:
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-08.html#rfc.section.6.3.p.3>

Trying to summarize WG opinion (see thread ending in
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005OctDec/0550.html>):

- define response marshalling for LOCK in exactly one place
- in lock introduction, just refer to that place and do not make any additional
statements
- Servers MUST return Lock-Token response headers
- Servers MUST return <lockdiscovery> response, and that response MUST contain
all information about the newly created lock (and MAY also contain information
about other (shared) locks, so clients must use the lock token from the response
header as pointer into the response)
- Make sure all examples match




------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Received on Saturday, 19 November 2005 09:56:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:11 GMT