Subject: RE: rfc2518 issue: DEFER_LOCK_NULL_RESOURCES_IN_SPEC

From: "Jason Crawford" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 00:38:30 -0400

Can have a few more people speak up on the above thread.   So far we've
just heard from Geoff and Lisa.  Any comments on either of their postings?
Any additional comments?

------------------------------------------
Phone: 914-784-7569,   [email-masked]

---

From: "Stefan Eissing" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:22:20 +0200

> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Jason Crawford
>

As an implementor of server and client software using WebDAV, I would
have gladly skipped the mechanisms known as lock-null resources. As
Geoff pointed out in this thread, there are alternatives for clients to
live without them (although not quite as comfortable).

But the choice to include lock-null has been made in the past and I see
more trouble with abandoning it, than keeping it. Every implementation
I've seen (and that might be too few) implements lock-null correctly.

Apart from certain software from Seattle based companies: their server
has an incomplete implementation, which works only for ordinary resources.
It works good enough for the Seattle client software which uses this
feature.

Now, if WebDAV removes lock-null, every server implementor would have
to support it anyway, because 90% of the users use those Seattle clients.
I therefore see nothing to gain on the server side by abandoning lock-null.

On the client side, lock-null is a comfortable thing to use. So there is
nothing to gain either.

So, I'd say: let's embrace and extend lock-null resources.