- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 11:14:04 +0100
- To: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Webdav WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:
> How about for REBIND:
>
> (DAV:lock-deleted): If the URL specified in the DAV:href element in the
> request body was protected by a write-lock at the time of the request,
> that write-lock must have been deleted by the request.
>
> And something similar for UNBIND.
OK, here's the change:
UNBIND postcondition:
(DAV:lock-deleted): If the internal member URI of the binding
specified by the Request-URI and the DAV:segment element in the
request body was protected by a write-lock at the time of the
request, that write-lock must have been deleted by the request.
REBIND postcondition:
(DAV:lock-deleted): If the URL specified in the DAV:href element
in the request body was protected by a write-lock at the time of
the request, that write-lock must have been deleted by the
request.
(note that for UNBIND the actual URI is composed from request-URI and
DAV:segment in the request body).
From Geoff's and my point of view, we have now resolved those issues
raised by Lisa which indeed warranted a document change. As these
changes are minor, we *could* proceed with draft 04 as base for the
working group last call, but of course I can also produce a -05 draft
early next week and submit that (Opinions?).
Regards, Julian
--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Saturday, 20 March 2004 05:18:39 UTC