- From: Geoffrey M. Clemm <gclemm@tantalum.atria.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:08:41 -0500
- To: yarong@microsoft.com
- Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com> RFC 2518 requires that a LOCK lock a resource. Fair enough. A reference is a resource. I'll buy that. A LOCK against a reference MUST lock the reference. No it doesn't. The target of a reference is also a resource. All methods other than MOVE and DELETE operate on the target of the reference, not on the reference itself. It is therefore both consistent and natural for the LOCK to apply to the *target* resource. Do you expect a PUT to apply to the (non-existent) body of the reference itself? I understand your desire to have the LOCK not only lock the body of the resource, but also lock the "binding" of the URL to that particular resource. But the unacceptable consequences of doing so have been pointed out in earlier messages in this thread. Cheers, Geoff
Received on Thursday, 4 March 1999 23:08:46 UTC