RE: error condition for delete of VHR when VCR is in checked-in c ollection from Tim Ellison on 2002-07-09 (ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org from July to September 2002)

From: Tim Ellison <tim@ellison.name>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 21:38:50 +0100
To: <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FDEHJMOEIDFPFLBKEICGKECECHAA.tim@ellison.name>

> I think we need to distinguish between
>
> a) references to version histories / versions that are correct,
> but specific
> users may not dereference/GET them (I don't have any problem with
> that), and

Agreed.

> b) references that are dead (because the resource they point to is gone).
>
> In case b), there's no way a subsequent CHECKIN or CHECKOUT can satisfy
> RFC3253's postconditions, so I'd consider this a broken state. There
> shouldn't be a protocol-tolerated way to get into this state, right?

Agreed.  ...and there is no way in HTTP to ensure that a resource is gone,
so we are cool, right?

Regards,
Tim

Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2002 16:38:52 UTC