- From: James D Myers <jd_myers@ccmail.pnl.gov>
- Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 10:39:20 -0700
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, "Gregory J. Woodhouse" <gjw@wnetc.com>
I think it's the List part of ACL (Access Control List) that gets into
implementation. If I understand, everyone wants access control
specified, but doesn't want to restrict how it's done to lists,at
least in the design. Directory based, role based, ... , don't have a
list per se.
Jim
Jim Myers
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: access control
Author: "Gregory J. Woodhouse" <gjw@wnetc.com> at -SMTPLink
Date: 5/2/97 9:11 AM
I agree that WEBDAV shouldn't become involved in specifying
implementations, but I do think it is not only appropriate but necessary
for us to specify requirements for access control. Perhaps the term ACL
conjures up images Windows NT, OpenVMS and some flavors of UNIX. As such,
it does sound like an implementation approach, but I think access control
is a design issue and not an implementation issue. Or am I missing the
point?
---
Gregory Woodhouse
gjw@wnetc.com / http://www.wnetc.com/home.html
If you're going to reinvent the wheel, at least try to come
up with a better one.
Received on Friday, 2 May 1997 13:37:06 UTC