W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2006

Re: Etag-on-write, 2nd attempt (== IETF draft 01)

From: Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 01:33:40 +0200
Message-Id: <274FFB6E-4B6B-47AA-BBA4-9E7481D9990D@opengroupware.org>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

On Sep 13, 2006, at 24:55, Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> It's technically correct to say that servers are allowed to rewrite  
> content.  However, existing deployed offline-cache clients assume  
> that they do not.

To the client it doesn't(/shouldn't) matter whether the server  
rewrote the content or whether another client did? They need to deal  
with the situation anyway? It changed and they need to update the  
data. The earlier they get changes by "others" the better, ideally in  
the PUT response (yes, it doesn't even need to be the case that the  
server modified the resource if the etag changes, it could have been  
a different client).

Existing deployed servers assume that they do that. I don't think  
that one or the other has an "advantage" here :-)

Greets,
   Helge
-- 
Helge Hess
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/
Received on Tuesday, 12 September 2006 23:34:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:49:46 GMT