Re: Webdav issue: UNLOCK_BY_NON_LOCK_OWNERS

It is fine with me, as long as a server can refuse the UNLOCK even if it
does not implement the ACL specification.

Cheers,
-g

On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 01:30:26PM -0400, Jason Crawford wrote:
> 
> 
> Just so it doesn't get overlooked....  do we agree with what Geoff has said
> below?
> 
> J.
> 
> ------------------------------------------
> Phone: 914-784-7569,   ccjason@us.ibm.com
> 
> 
> "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@Rational.Com>@w3.org on 08/21/2001 12:18:30 AM
> 
> Sent by:  w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> 
> 
> To:   Webdav WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
> cc:
> Subject:  RE: Webdav issue: UNLOCK_BY_NON_LOCK_OWNERS
> 
> 
> Well, that's a really easy change, i.e. all you have to do is
> absolutely nothing (:-).  Currently, section 11 in 2518 places
> no constraints on who can do an UNLOCK operation (i.e. if you
> can discover the lock token, you can request an UNLOCK).  The ACL spec
> introduces ways to constrain who can do an operation.  So we're done (:-).
> 
> Cheers,
> Geoff
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Crawford [mailto:ccjason@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 11:57 PM
> To: Webdav WG
> Subject: RE: Webdav issue: UNLOCK_BY_NON_LOCK_OWNERS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds like we might have consensus opinion that the power to unlock
> someone else's locked resource should be under ACL control.   Could someone
> that feels strongly about this propose a wording and placement in 2518 that
> makes this proposal concrete?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> J.
> 
> ------------------------------------------
> Phone: 914-784-7569,   ccjason@us.ibm.com
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

Received on Sunday, 26 August 2001 21:01:05 UTC