W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2009

p6 2.7, suggested resolutions to comments 10 & 11.

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 02:03:42 +0200
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1248393822.14420.204.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Comments to the comments in p6 2.7

2.7 Combining Responses

        If the new response contains an ETag, it identifies the stored
        response to use. [rfc.comment.10: may need language about
        Content-Location here][rfc.comment.11: cover case where INM with
        multiple etags was sent] 

10: Yes, with an almost identical sentence following

        If the new response does not contains an ETag but contains an
        Content-Location, it identifies the stored response to use.

covering the case where there is no ETag but Content-Location.

11: Don't see what needs to covered there. What's important is the ETag
found in the response, not which etag-values we sent in I-N-M. There
will only be at most one ETag in the response.

Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 00:04:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:50 UTC