- From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@cs.ucsc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:00:01 -0800
- To: "'WebDAV \(WebDAV WG\)'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Geoff Clemm writes: > But with the semantics that Jim suggests, some of those members will remain > mysteriously unlocked, and the editor just fails with "unexpectedly missing > lock" when the user attempts to edit (or even worse, allows the user to edit > an unlocked resource, without overwrite protection). and > Surely any server > that is bold enough to support both binding loops and depth locking would > support the DAV:lockroot property introduced a while ago to solve exactly > this problem of not knowing where a lock comes from. These are good points. That, plus the fact that I'm getting nowhere in convincing anyone else to change the semantics of loopback bindings, leads me to concede this point. It's now fine with me not to include any additional language in the BIND specification about locks and lookback bindings. - Jim
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2004 00:01:05 UTC