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

Re: i22: ETags on PUT responses

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:43:13 +0100
Message-ID: <477E4601.6050305@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
> <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/22>
> 
> In Vancouver, discussion focused on the definition of ETag as a response 
> header, rather than an entity header; 2616 says:
> 
>> The ETag response-header field provides the current value of the 
>> entity tag for the requested variant.
> 
> and:
>> The response-header fields allow the server to pass additional 
>> information about the response which cannot be placed in the Status- 
>> Line. These header fields give information about the server and about 
>> further access to the resource identified by the Request-URI.
>>
> 
> Below, I'll try to summarise my understanding of where we now sit; 
> please correct me if I haven't got it right.
> ...

For the record: this exactly matches my understanding since this topic 
was brought up over two years ago over here.

In particular:

- E does not apply to Rq

- the presence of E in Rs does not necessarily imply that the body sent 
with PUT was stored octet-by-octet

- E does not depend on the request method, just on URI & selecting headers

And yes, this needs to be resolved in sync with 
<http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/69>

BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 4 January 2008 14:43:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:36 GMT