W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 1995

Still trying to make sense of HTTP caching model

From: Shel Kaphan <sjk@amazon.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 1995 18:01:06 -0700
Message-Id: <199509060101.SAA16604@bert.amazon.com>
To: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Jeffrey Mogul writes:
	...

 >    2.	Cache this object but always validate before using
 > 	   (i.e., "Expires: 1 January 1900")

I see. This actually gives a reasonable meaning to this construct.
This meaning seems better than simply "don't cache this", and works well with
GET if-<whatever>.  With plain GET it is equivalent to not caching.
	...

 > (B) When may the cache be used to satisfy a request:
 > 
 > Presumably, this is simply a list of methods that can be satisfied
 > from a cache, if the cache entry is valid (or non-expired).  Since
 > we may expect new methods to be added to HTTP, this list should include
 > a rationale for why certain methods are included or excluded.
 > 

Yes, this seems like the generally right "definition" of the property
in question, but since HTTP is extensible, the list will never include
methods with the same property but not defined by the spec, which is
why I suggested "Cache-control: serve-from-cache".

--Shel
Received on Tuesday, 5 September 1995 18:12:47 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:31:31 EDT