- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:11:28 +0100
- To: <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> > 25) Section 13.4 (lockroot) > > > > Proposal: only require it for deep locks. > > I have no preference... unless we have a reason to want to know what URI mapping > is protected. If we do, then it should apply even to depth 0 locks. Right. I think I originally wrote this when I hadn't thought through the implications of multiple bindings to locks. The idea was to break old, mis-behaving clients (that do not use the WebDAV XML extensibility rules) only when we must (i.e., when it was collection lock with depth != 0). So yes, DAV:lockroot should always be present. > FWIW... there is some sort of quotation > marks around "rooted" in that section on that > html page that don't show up > right on my browsers. Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Monday, 17 March 2003 10:11:35 UTC