- 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