- From: Tim Ellison <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 10:38:10 +0100
- To: "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
I agree with Lisa. Lisa wrote: > Well, since I was the one who brought it up, here are > my thoughts. > > It seems not entirely unreasonable to have a system > where the resource owner can remove locks on their > resource, even locks that the resource owner did not > create. With ACLs in the mix, this makes even more > sense. After all, if somebody has the ability to > grant permission whether or not somebody can lock a > resource, they might as well have the ability to remove > locks. > > To the client that had their lock disappear, it's just > like the lock expired. They can try to get another. > There may be changes they may have to merge. > > Now it doesn't have to be the resource owner that can > do this. It can be entirely up to the implementation > or the lock policy. This is made nicely possible in > WebDAV because it makes the locktoken available for > anybody to use to try to UNLOCK the resource. It just > leaves it up to the implementation whether or not to > allow this to succeed.
Received on Monday, 16 July 2001 06:11:06 UTC