- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 14:59:30 +0200
- To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Geoff, I think it sould be the other way around: - when the source was locked, just report 423 on the source, - when the source wasn't copied because it's destination was locked, report 409 for the source and throw in a pointer to the locked destination. > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 2:54 PM > To: WebDAV > Subject: RE: need clarification about COPY to locked resource response > cod e > > > I'd just do: > ... > <D:response> > <D:href>/bla/...</D:href> > <D:status>HTTP/1.1 409 CONFLICT</D:status> > <D:responsedescription> > <D:error> > <D:locked-source> > <D:href>/other/...</D:href> > </D:locked-source> > </D:error> > </D:responsedescription> > </D:response> > > This is assuming the MOVE failed because the source was locked. > If it failed because the destination was locked, then it would > just be: > > ... > <D:response> > <D:href>/bla/...</D:href> > <D:status>HTTP/1.1 423 LOCKED</D:status> > </D:response> > > Cheers, > Geoff > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Eissing [mailto:stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de] > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 4:06 AM > To: WebDAV > Subject: Re: need clarification about COPY to locked resource response > cod e > > > > Am Montag den, 22. April 2002, um 02:40, schrieb Clemm, Geoff: > > > From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de] > > > [...] > > - MAY contain response elements for targets that caused the failure. > > > > That would be OK with me but I'd prefer to nest the information > > about targets that caused the failure in the response element for the > > source resource that wasn't moved/copied/deleted. This is a change > > from RFC 2518, but I think it is warranted. > > > > It might be woth thinking to also add some kind of linkage > > between the > > two > > response elements. > > > > I agree. That is the purpose for nesting the information about the > > targets that caused the failure in the response for the target that > > was not copied. > > So, as usual I propose a format which will make everyone scream and > come up with a much better one. > > ... > <D:response> > <D:href>/bla/...</D:href> > <D:status>HTTP/1.1 409 CONFLICT</D:status> > <D:cause> > <D:href>/other/...</D:href> > <D:status>HTTP/1.1 423 LOCKED</D:status> > </D:cause> > </D:response> > > //Stefan >
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 08:59:46 UTC