- From: Tim Olsen <tolsen718@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 11:35:11 -0400
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Geoffrey M Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
On 3/29/07, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Tim: speaking of which, was there anything in > draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-18 > (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-18.html>) > or draft-ietf-webdav-bind-18 > (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-18.html>) > suggesting something else? Somewhat. The very beginning of section 9.9 of 2518bis says "The MOVE operation on a non-collection resource is the logical equivalent of a copy (COPY), followed by consistency maintenance processing, followed by a delete of the source, where all three actions are performed in a single operation" which might imply that one does not require the locktoken. But the bind draft is pretty clear that REBIND and BIND require the locktoken. This would imply that if I implemented MOVE using REBIND, then MOVE would require the locktoken. I think that's how I got confused. Thanks for the clarification. Cheers, Tim > > Best regards, Julian >
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2007 15:35:35 UTC