- From: Tim Ellison <tim@ellison.name>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 16:50:11 +0100
- To: "'Deltav WG'" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Stefan Eissing wrote: > The result of a GET has to be cacheable by HTTP proxies. I see nothing to prevent the response from a GET including a 'Cache-Control: no-cache' header. Why do you say that? > For the LABEL header to be compliant with GET, it has to > select a variant (as variant in rfc2616) of the resource I disagree that it has to select a variant (or at least I haven't been shown why yet). > and declare so in the Vary header. The Vary: header doesn't state the result is a variant, or otherwise. > I think there is no way around it without breaking GET and I hear > that Roy Fielding has got a big knife and is after the SOAP guys for > related matters... How does it break GET? (This discussion is drifting all over the map!) > I think LABEL has to be rethought. Clearly it has to be clarified. We had a number of working group review periods, and all the authors signed it off in it's current form; so I hope it isn't too far away from sanity. Regards, Tim
Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2002 11:50:31 UTC