There was  indeed a problem specific  to list locking in  addition to the
"failure to recognize new value of  keywords" that was fixed by 16E-002O.
The GET command was modified in release 1.6a to provide the date/time and
userid of the person who locked the  list; at the same time, the keywords
processor  was  changed  to  return  that  data  along  with  the  YES/NO
indication, and for some unknown reason  (looking at the 1.6a code) I had
written "Pull" instead of "Parse  pull". After the keywords processor was
entirely rewritten for 1.6e I stopped  having "special case" code for the
LOCKED keyword, and it was no longer  upcased (and indeed I do *not* want
it  upcased since  it  contains  an e-mail  address  which  might have  a
lowercase userid). Unfortunately  some EXEC's couldn't cope  with a mixed
case answer, hence  the "not locked" answer you were  getting. An updated
copy of the EXEC's in question  is available as 16E-005O FIX (again, it's
"zero zero blah oh" not "zero zero  blah zero", I'm sorry for this naming
convention but  all the IBM terminals  I have used make  it impossible to
confuse 0 and O unless you're blind  as a mole, looking at my colleagues'
ASCII terminals  I see that this  can indeed be a  *serious* problem with
other terminals...)
 
  Eric