- From: <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 17:37:39 -0400
- To: ccjason@us.ibm.com
- cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
No comments on my previous note with this Title? Anyway, that note suggested that when we say a lock protects a URI, we truly mean a URI to resource mapping, not a binding and not a resource. (BTW: An interesting situation is listed near the bottom of that note that you might want to agree or disagree with.) It also hinted at odd situations where we'd presumably have to reassign a protected URI to a lock if MOVE and BINDs and DELETEs occur. ------------------------------------------ Phone: 914-784-7569, ccjason@us.ibm.com
Received on Saturday, 11 September 1999 17:30:35 UTC