W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1996

Re: Issue List: CACHEDATE

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 07:27:45 PST
To: fjh@cs.vu.nl
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <96Feb14.072754pst.2733@golden.parc.xerox.com>
> I can contribute an application which causes I-M-S dates differing from
> the original modification time. Assume that documents are created on the
> fly by a server/CGI script using multiple other documents or some
> external data. The overall modification time is computed as the latest
> modification time of all parts.

> If the browser uses this modification time for an I-M-S request and if
> one of the document's parts is fetched using a proxy mechanism the
> original modification time of this part is no longer available. Thus,
> the I-M-S time used in requesting this part may be later than the
> modification time for this part and, refering to the example above, the
> server should return 304, because this part has not changed.

I'm confused by your example. If the parts are not modified, then they
have the same date as they had the first time. If they ARE modified,
then they have a different date. If you can't tell whether the parts
are modified, then you can't tell the modification time.
Received on Wednesday, 14 February 1996 07:39:52 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:31:45 EDT