- From: <bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu>
- Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 12:22:16 -0800
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179
Summary: DAV:no-lock
Product: WebDAV-RFC2518-bis
Version: -08
Platform: Other
URL: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-
rfc2518bis-08.html#rfc.section.9.5.3.p.4
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: 09. HTTP Headers for Distributed Authoring
AssignedTo: joe-bugzilla@cursive.net
ReportedBy: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de
QAContact: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-08.html#rfc.section.9.5.3.p.4>:
"The Not production is particularly useful with the "<DAV:no-lock>" state token.
The clause "Not <DAV:no-lock>" MUST evaluate to true. Thus, any "OR" statement
containing the clause "Not <DAV:no-lock>" MUST also evaluate to true."
Again, Dav:no-lock is not anything special. It's an *example* for a URI that by
definition never identifies a lock (like "DAV:lock", for instance). So a
normative MUST is incorrect here. Just say
"The Not production is particularly useful with a state token known not to ever
identify a lock, such as "DAV:no-lock". The clause "Not <DAV:no-lock>" will
evaluate to true. Thus, any "OR" statement containing the clause "Not
<DAV:no-lock>" will also evaluate to true."
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Received on Sunday, 20 November 2005 20:22:20 UTC