- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:09:47 -0700
- To: "Hall, Shaun" <Shaun.Hall@gbr.xerox.com>, "Webdav WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Shaun said: > Supposing the server only supported infinite timed locks (which > is allowed) > and therefore lost locks through timeouts are not an issue. You've just > bypassed the lock mechanism as we know it. In my crude example, > what is the > original lock creator suppose to do ? > If the server only supports infinite timed locks, it's also free to prevent anybody but the original lock creator to use the associated lock token. This proposed clarification doesn't force anything on server implementors that they don't like. It only makes clients have to be more robust in the face of locks disappearing. lisa
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2001 12:25:26 UTC