W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2006

Re: rfc2518bis-14: locking terminology

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:34:00 +0200
Message-ID: <44469EB8.9020305@gmx.de>
To: Manfred Baedke <manfred.baedke@greenbytes.de>
CC: John Barone <jbarone@xythos.com>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org


this thread contains lots of thoughtful comments, in particular:

- make sure that we properly use the terminology we have introduced

- make sure that if we need other terminology, we properly define it upfront

- define *once* what the lockable state of a resource/collections is, 
and simplify the remainder of section 6/7 based on that

- clearly say once what a lock is (it is a resource, identified by a 
URI) and give those aspects of a lock proper names, such as in 

-- lock access type (currently only write)

-- lock scope (exclusive/shared)

-- lock root (URL)

-- lock depth

-- client supplied owner information

-- lock creator

-- timeout

...these aspects fully describe a lock. As Manfred correctly stated, 
there's no such thing as moving a lock, as in general, a lock doesn't 
have a location.

Best regards,

Received on Wednesday, 19 April 2006 20:39:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:40 UTC