- From: <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 17:42:59 -0400
- To: jamsden@us.ibm.com
- cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
<ja>
4. LOCK locks the resource, not the bindings. If the namespace needs to be
controlled, then the user should lock the applicable parent collections.
</ ja>
<jlc>
I agree that that's what seems to be suggested. I just want to add, "ouch!
That's a painful way to protect a URI.".
</jlc>
<jra>
Then what are collections for if not to manage and control the namespace? What
else could locking a collection mean? Note that it does not have to be a deep
lock.
</jra>
<jlc/> I agree that collections are to manage and control namespace. My
editorial comment was that locking a whole collection to protect a single
binding seems like a lot of overkill. And if you want to protect a URI
mapping... you'd have to lock the collection chain up to the root. Even more
overkill.
Received on Friday, 24 September 1999 17:37:06 UTC