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

Re: 12, 14.43: resource arguments and conneg

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 03:03:37 -0700
To: burchard@cs.princeton.edu
Cc: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <9606030303.aa08377@paris.ics.uci.edu>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/725
> Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com> writes:
>> All your missing is that the text apparently doesn't say
>> something that we all assume, which one might otherwise write as: 
>>	Vary: {entity-body}, {method}


Paul Burchard <burchard@cs.princeton.edu> replies:

> Right...though this example shows why it may be worth spelling out  
> the assumptions.  The "argument" of a method consists of not just  
> the bare entity body in the request, but also any associated *entity  
> headers* (as caches must be aware).  So the "understood variation"  
> of a response must be (to use your notation):
>    Vary: {request-URI}, {method}, {{entity-headers}, {entity-body}}

Double-ugh.  While I appreciate the semantics of the discussion,
please do us all a favor and not illustrate the semantics with a
realistic-looking example of bogus syntax; some poor fool might
read it and then implement the Vary header that way.

More discussion of what is assumed by Vary can be found in

 ...Roy T. Fielding
    Department of Information & Computer Science    (fielding@ics.uci.edu)
    University of California, Irvine, CA 92717-3425    fax:+1(714)824-4056
Received on Monday, 3 June 1996 03:07:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:17 UTC