- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:37:15 +0100
- CC: webdav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Geoffrey M Clemm wrote: > > I agree that it would be desireable to add the statement Joe suggests > to the binding specification, and I like the editorial changes suggested > by Chuck and Julian. > > Cheers, > Geoff Ok, so do we have consensus to add the following subsection to section 2 (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-latest.html#overview.of.bindings>)? 2.x UNLOCK and Bindings Due to the specific language used in section 8.11 of [RFC2518], it might be thought that an UNLOCK request to a locked resource would unlock just the binding of the Request-URI. This is not the case, however. Section 6 of [RFC2518] clearly states that locks are on resources, not URIs, so the server MUST allow UNLOCK to be used to unlock a locked resource through any binding to that resource. The authors of this specification anticipate and recommend that future revisions of [RFC2518] maintain this behavior. Best regards, Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2005 19:37:58 UTC