- From: <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 14:54:22 -0500
- To: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
- cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
If you mean locks implied by a Tagged-List in the If: header, then that just doesn't make sense :-) That's what I meant. I don't know if it makes sense or not, but I'm perfectly willing to say that "it" is not supported. And I agree that it seems somewhat odd that we use the IF header to determine what locks are to be refreshed. I would think this should work just as UNLOCK does. That's not to say people can't use an IF header, but that's not how they specify which of the locks is to be refreshed. The IF header would only be for consistancy checking if the client wanted the refresh to be contingent on the presence of a specified lock on some specified resource. Now I also recognize that changing this might break some clients/servers. Before we could change this, we'd have to come to a consensus that we're willing to change our implementations. J.
Received on Friday, 26 November 1999 14:54:46 UTC