- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 17:38:58 -0400
- To: WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Fine by me. Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Jason Crawford [mailto:ccjason@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 4:41 PM To: Clemm, Geoff Cc: WebDAV Subject: Issue: COPYMOVE_LOCKED_STATUS_CODE_CLARIFICATION The recent thread entitled RE: need clarification about COPY to locked resource response cod e and RE: need clarification about COPY to locked resource response cod e recently died down with the following posting. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2002AprJun/0043.html I just want to bring it to conclusion and get it on the ISSUES list. So we have a proposal on the table regarding error reporting for lock conflicts during COPY/MOVE. I'll try to describe it below. If a portion of the destination is locked and preventing a portion of the COPY/MOVE, then a 207 Multistatus MUST be returned by the server. That MultiStatus response should indicate (with 409 Conflict status) what source resource could not be copied/moved and optionally say something about the locked destination resource the locked that prevented the copy. <D:response> <D:href>/bla/source</D:href> <D:status>HTTP/1.1 409 CONFLICT</D:status> <D:responsedescription> <D:error> <D:locked-destination> <D:href>/other/destref...</D:href> </D:locked-source> </D:error> </D:responsedescription> </D:response> That D:error tag is optional. And clearly we'd need the add definitions for the D:error tag and the descendent tags listed in the example above. We should work out if the dest URL listed is the root of the lock or the locked resource that was directly affecting the operation. We should possibly clarify "protected URL" status codes and what URL is depicted. If none of the COPY/MOVE could be done due to a locked destination, then it is acceptable, although obviously not optimal, to simply return a 409 CONFLICT rather than a 207 MULTISTATUS. As for *source* locks... Source lock error don't occur for COPY, just MOVE. And the 423 LOCKED status code will be used instead of 409 CONFLICT. More specifically... In the case of a MOVE operations where a portion of the source is locked, the server is to respond with 207 MULTISTATUS and the body of that will simply indicate the locked source resources with a 423 LOCKED status. <D:response> <D:href>/bla/...</D:href> <D:status>HTTP/1.1 423 LOCKED</D:status> </D:response> In the case that the request (source) URL is locked in a way that prevents any other MOVEs to occur, the server is free to simply reply with a 423 LOCKED rather than a 407 MULTISTATUS. In all cases, minimization rules apply. I will start a seperate thread for Minimization issues if necessary. So does this sound acceptable to everyone? J.
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2002 17:39:31 UTC