- From: Dylan Barrell <dbarrell@opentext.ch>
- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 09:23:06 -0400
- To: Dylan Barrell <dbarrell@opentext.ch>, "'Del Jensen'" <dcjensen@novell.com>, "'-=jack=-'" <jack@twaxx.twaxx.com>, "mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch" <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>, "'Yaron Goland'" <yarong@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "w3c-dist-auth@w3.org" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Our system - Livelink! Don't get confused betwen OS and document management software. the requirements are quite different for the two (currently). Cheers Dylan ---------- From: Yaron Goland[SMTP:yarong@microsoft.com] Sent: Dienstag, 2. September 1997 16:18 To: '-=jack=-'; 'Del Jensen'; mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch; Dylan Barrell Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: RE: Locks, reservations, copies and moves Before I go off on a rant, what systems currently allow you to retain a lock when you move a file? Yaron > -----Original Message----- > From: -=jack=- [SMTP:jack@twaxx.twaxx.com] > Sent: Monday, September 01, 1997 9:43 AM > To: 'Del Jensen'; mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch; Yaron Goland; Dylan Barrell > Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > Subject: Re: Locks, reservations, copies and moves > > Th behaviour of removing a lock when moving a resource is bound to > result in > overwrite conflicts due to locks being inadvertantly lost through some > structural re-organisation. This will also require that only the owner > of the > lock be able to move the resource which is unnecessarily restrictive > in a > shared authoring environment where one individual might be responsible > for > content and another for structure. > -------- > I would say that a lock must be retained when a resource is moved. > This > is something of a grey area WRT locks and the prevention of > overwriting of > content. The main purpose of the lock is to maintain the consistency > of > content when one author out of potentially many is modifying the > content. > This prevention of other authors modifying the content must be > maintained > whether or not an administrator decides to move the entire resource to > some > other location. Note that this isn't dangerous to the content, unless > the > lock is NOT maintained. I would argue that the lock should simply be > moved with the resource, which allows administrators the freedom to do > their jobs without interfering with the maintenance of the consistency > of > content, which is the job the lock does for multiple authors. > > -=jack=- > > (This text composed by voice) > > > --
Received on Wednesday, 3 September 1997 03:26:27 UTC