- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 21:08:31 -0500
- To: "'WebDAV'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
From: Brian Korver [mailto:briank@xythos.com] Other than loops, what are the problems unique to multiple bindings and partial MOVE? One example was posted in the message below: From: Clemm, Geoff [gclemm@Rational.Com] Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 6:34 PM Subject: RE: Move and Delete (was: bind draft issues) ... because it can cause a DELETE in one collection to cause a change in another collection, and this kind of "deletion side effect" was something we explicitly were trying to avoid. For example, suppose /henry/has-friend/jeff and /jim/has-friend/jeff were bindings to the same collection, JEFF, and JEFF has a binding named "wife" to a resource, MARI. Now suppose henry gets mad at jeff, and issues a "DELETE /henry/has-friend/jeff" request. But suppose at that moment someone else has a Depth:0 lock on the /henry/has-friend collection. The result of a "best effort" deletion is the removal of the "wife" binding from JEFF. That may be OK if you were just updating the information accessible from /henry (he isn't JEFF's friend anymore, and he's happy to purge as much information about JEFF as he can), but with multiple bindings, "best effort" deletion has now trashed the JEFF object in all the other contexts in which it is still visible (and the folks that still are his friends are still interested in that information). So we're not saying that "best effort deletion" is always a bad thing, but we are saying that "best effort deletion" is a bad thing when you care about multiple bindings to the same resource.
Received on Friday, 7 March 2003 21:08:38 UTC