- From: Eric Sedlar <esedlar@us.oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 12:59:09 -0800
- To: ccjason@us.ibm.com
- CC: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Can a server implementer build both strong & weak BINDings and only allow cycles in weak bindings? --Eric ccjason@us.ibm.com wrote: > Alternately, a server implementer can disallow cyclic > bindings from being inserted in the first place, which is > computationally much cheaper, but which restricts the usefulness of > BINDings. (Like the way UNIX restricts hard links to directories). > > This is now forbidden by the spec. > > Just to clarify. By "this" Geoff was refering to the possibility of the > server not supporting cycles. The proposed changes now require servers > to allow cycles to be created. Geoff was not suggesting anything > regarding hard links to directories. Well either you can use the UNIX filesystem to support advanced collections or you can't. It sounds like the current answer is that you can't.
Received on Tuesday, 7 December 1999 16:07:48 UTC