W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: ETags and concurrency control

From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 20:37:55 +0100
To: Werner Baumann <werner.baumann@onlinehome.de>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080502193755.GA4950@shareable.org>

Werner Baumann wrote:
> Things are quite different, when you think of weak etags meaning not 
> byte-by-byte, but semantically equal. But there is the whole mess. These 
> are two completely different and unrelated concepts.
> - insecure (or unreliable): there is a small chance, that the entity 
> changed without changing the etag, and the change may be completely 
> arbitrary.
> - semantically equivalent, though not byte-by-byte equal.
> As long as you try to get this two concepts into one definition of weak 
> etag, it will stay a confusing mess.

Plus, when you serve a "semantically equivalent" weak ETag, you can't
serve a strong ETag at the same time.

This is a silly limitation: supporting weak comparison (whatever it
means) shouldn't prevent strong caching from being possible!

-- Jamie
Received on Friday, 2 May 2008 19:38:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:45 UTC