Re: [Bug 179] DAV:no-lock

I agree with Julian.

Cheers,
Geoff

Julian wrote on 12/31/2005 05:40:46 AM:

> 
> http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179
> 
> julian.reschke@greenbytes.de changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>              Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
>          Resolution|FIXED                       |
>             Version|-08                         |-09
> 
> 
> 
> ------- Additional Comments From julian.reschke@greenbytes.de 
> 2005-12-31 02:40 -------
> (now in
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-09.
> html#rfc.section.9.5.4.p.4>)
> 
> I still that this is the incorrect approach. Don't use RFC2119 keywords 
for
> stuff that is a consequence from other requirements. Just explain 
> why it follows
> (if you feel that's necessary), but don't claim it's a requirement 
> on it's own,
> because that may confuse people to think that DAV:no-lock is special and
> different from something like DAV:this-is-really-a-locktoken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
>