- From: Roy Seto <Roy.Seto@oracle.com>
- Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2001 10:44:55 -0700
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
I'm following up on this discussion from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-dav-versioning/2001OctDec/0021.html in a separate thread. At this point, I'm just looking for clarification whether my interpretation of the spec is accurate. I wrote: - Activity feature: Is there an interoperable way to "close" an activity (that is, prevent any more checkouts or checkins in that activity)? Followup: if not, how much demand would there be for standardizing this concept? Geoff replied: I suggest we should soon start a follow-on "change request" working group (we could start under the auspices of the WebDAV working group). In particular, we would then discuss various states that an activity could be in, and how to standardize transitions between those states (is PROPPATCH enough?). Minimally, we could decide on some standard XML element for the state field of an activity, and a few "standard" state values. Perhaps a BOF at the Dec IETF? -- Continuing this discussion, Geoff's proposal sounds reasonable to me, though I'm not sure I have any activity states to propose beyond "closed" and "not closed." To validate my understanding of the spec, it seems to me that there is currently no interoperable way to prevent checkouts and checkins from occurring in an activity. In particular, RFC 2518 write locks on the activity resource don't do this because RFC 2518 Section 9.3 says While those without a write lock may not alter a property on a resource it is still possible for the values of live properties to change, even while locked, due to the requirements of their schemas. Only dead properties and live properties defined to respect locks are guaranteed not to change while write locked. So taking a write lock on the activity resource does not restrict changes on that activity's DAV:activity-version-set or DAV:activity-checkout-set property values. Also, draft-ietf-webdav-acl-06 Section 3.2 says The [DAV:write] privilege controls methods that modify the content, dead properties, or (in the case of a collection) membership of a resource, such as PUT or PROPPATCH. So restricting the DAV:write privilege in an activity resource's DAV:acl property doesn't restrict changes in that activity's DAV:activity-version-set or DAV:activity-checkout-set either. Is my understanding correct? Thanks, Roy
Received on Sunday, 7 October 2001 13:41:43 UTC