Subject: RE: HOW_TO_IDENTIFY_LOCK_OWNER

From: "Clemm, Geoff" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 14:42:16 -0500

And of course:
The value specified in the DAV:lockowner field of a LOCK
request is available in the DAV:lockowner field in the DAV:lockdiscovery
property.

Cheers,
Geoff 

-----Original Message-----
From: Clemm, Geoff [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 2:28 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: HOW_TO_IDENTIFY_LOCK_OWNER

I would describe our conclusion as:

We need to define a new field, say DAV:lockowner, that is specified
in a LOCK request, and that takes an XML value.  We will define
some standard elements for that value.

We should then deprecate the use of the DAV:owner field, as a field
that contains non-interoperable data about the lock owner.

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Crawford [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:35 PM
To: Daniel Brotsky; [email-masked]; Lisa Dusseault
Subject: RE: HOW_TO_IDENTIFY_LOCK_OWNER

It sounds like we've concluded that we can't reuse the lockowner field
because we've already specified that it's free text.

Do we still have the requirement mentioned at...

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2001JulSep/0218.html
says...

regarding identifying the owner of a lock?  If so, now that we've had some
discussion on this topic, can someone provide an improved definition of the
requirement?    And a proposal?  Dan?  Lisa? Geoff?  Julian?

J.

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