On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Paul Newby wrote:
> <thinking out loud>
> Seems a little odd that someone with authority to create or
> delete an article wouldn't have the same authority over links
> to it.
Depends on how you look at it. I probably have a very technical (and
unix-oriented at that) view of things. In my world, symlinks are
first-class objects that can have totally separated ownership (as is
the case with symlinks in your typical unix FS).
Having the links removed automatically, even if not owned by
the target owner, is just an its-wrong-but-sane thing. I don't
want to grant the target owner automatic permission to change or
delete the links, but if the target goes the links will not make
sense anymore, since they link to IDs, and these are not reused.
> On the other hand, it's probably not a bad thing if
> this person is obliged to consult the group responsible for
> any referencing topics before the target disappears.
Obliged sounds good to me, but forced not. I think the article
owner must be able to remove it even if it is linked to.
Bye,
Emile
--
This is The Midgard Project's mailing list. For more information,
please visit the project's web site at http://www.midgard-project.org
To unsubscribe the list, send an empty email message to address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
