- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:15:27 -0500
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
But a label header is not allowed with an UPDATE request (it wouldn't make sense, because an UPDATE request must be applied to a version-controlled resource, and a Label header applies a request to a version). Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein@lyra.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 8:02 AM To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Subject: Re: errors in 9.8 and 9.9 Same text, but refer to the DAV:version element instead (within the text, and for the precondition name) Cheers, -g On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 07:31:45AM -0500, Clemm, Geoff wrote: > Thanks for finding that, Greg! Yes, it was supposed to go in the > CHECKOUT preconditions, not the UPDATE preconditions. > > What did you have in mind for a new precondition for 9.9 (UPDATE)? > > Cheers, > Geoff > > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein@lyra.org] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 5:36 AM > To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > Subject: errors in 9.8 and 9.9 > > > The first precondition in 9.9 refers to DAV:apply-to-version. The UPDATE > method can have a DAV:version element. DAV:apply-to-version is used in > CHECKOUT. The name of the precondition would change, too. > > However, this precondition *does* apply to section 9.8 (CHECKOUT) (where it > is missing). Basically, move the precondition in 9.9 up to 9.8, and then > write a new one for 9.9. > > Cheers, > -g > > -- > Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/ -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Wednesday, 7 February 2001 08:07:20 UTC