- 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