RE: Etag-on-write, draft -04

> Now if there's broad agreement that RFC2616 is broken with respect to 
> this, let's fix it, potentially breaking some existing servers. But 
> let's be clear about that really is a change.

Well, you might find yourself going back to the early discussions
about etag and PUT (from 1996) to decide whether this 'really is a change'
rather than an editorial issue or clarification.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg-old/1996MayAug/0298.html
> While this isn't much of an issue today, it may become one.

Personally (having been in many of those early discussions) I'd
say this was a clarification rather than a 'change'.

Larry