- From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
- Date: 1998年7月28日 14:01:23 -0700
- To: "'John Stracke'" <francis@netscape.com>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
- Message-ID: <3FF8121C9B6DD111812100805F31FC0D02971716@red-msg-59.dns.microsoft.com>
The canonical answer to this problem is transactioning. Please see http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/tip-charter.html for more details. -----Original Message----- From: John Stracke [mailto:francis@netscape.com] Sent: Monday, July 27, 1998 2:20 PM To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: Deletes and Constraints Doug Davis wrote: > > Why not just lock the resource and overwrite it contents? > > Because the old and the new resources are different resources. If, at some > point in the future, someone asked for the 'old' resource by UUID I don't want > it to be found. I'm unclear on this scenario. Where did they get that UUID, and why would the old resource still be stored under it (or anywhere) after being overwritten? Are the old & new at two separate http: URLs? -- /====================================================================\ |John (Francis) Stracke |My opinions are my own.|S/MIME supported | |Software Retrophrenologist|=========================================| |Netscape Comm. Corp. |"And bring the search warrant." | |francis@netscape.com |"You mean the sledgehammer, sir?" "Yes." | \====================================================================/ New area code for work number: 650
Received on Tuesday, 28 July 1998 17:01:28 UTC