Yes, without locking, these scenarios are FOL (fact of life). Peace
deeje on 2005-11-06 5:29, Julian Reschke at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Eric Scheid wrote: >> On 6/11/05 10:10 PM, "Julian Reschke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> Speaking of which, why not require a HEAD request to check for changes, >>> or require a conditional GET (resulting in a 304 when the entity didn't >>> change) instead? >> >> >> Would you check for changes before you start typing your changes, or only >> before you try to PUT your changes? > > I would check before (if possible; maybe I wouldn't be online at that > point of time), but in the absence of locking, that wouldn't guarantee > that the resource isn't changed in the meantime before I'm finished typing. > > Even if it wasn't, there's no guarantee that somebody else will > overwrite it after I'm done, see for instance the description in > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2518.html#rfc.section.6.7>. > > Best regards, Julian
