W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2006

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-15.txt

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 12:00:10 +0200
Message-ID: <4486A3AA.40701@gmx.de>
To: Manfred Baedke <manfred.baedke@greenbytes.de>
CC: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

Well,

there's lots of stuff in Sections 6 and 7 that is redundant and partly 
misleading.

This very section however has been instrumental in explaining the 
relation between locking and bindings. Thus I personally would prefer 
not to remove it altogether (lots of people *didn't* grasp the 
relationship between locks, the resource being locked, and bindings of 
that resource, and it was good to have at least that statement in RFC2518).

Best regards, Julian



Manfred Baedke schrieb:
> 
> Julian,
> 
> I really think that the text can be dropped completely. I do not see any 
> implications that do not already follow from previous sections.
> 
> Regards,
> Manfred
> 
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> Lisa Dusseault schrieb:
>>>
>>> I would rather keep the text myself but I was trying to follow WG 
>>> consensus.  Do you have suggested changes to the text?
>>
>> Just change the text not to use the term "covered by", maybe say 
>> "protect".
>>
>> Best regards, Julian
>>
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2006 10:00:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:14 GMT