Lisa Dusseault wrote: > >>>Why have an architectural principle that holds us back, if >> >>it doesn't >> >>>give us something in return? >> >>It does. For instance, it allows us to define how locks and multiple >>bindings interact in a logical way. > > > This is exactly what I'm looking to understand, that I don't currently > understand. In fact, I thought that the interaction of locks and > multiple bindings was problematic. So how does this make them work > together in a logical way? Looking at the latest GULP (<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0367.html>), it nicely explains how locks work without even mentioning them specifically. Maybe you could re-read it and suggest what is unclear? Regards, Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2003 16:18:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 03:38:10 GMT