W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: NEW: #225: PUT and DELETE invalidation vs. staleness

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:10:13 +0200
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E3F50F1D-7605-47C8-BBDF-2F46C2668DF5@mnot.net>
To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>

On 29/07/2010, at 12:08 PM, Yves Lafon wrote:
> 
> Just checked my implementation, and it marks it as stale, mandating revalidation. It is really up to implementation, so p2 should defer to p6 for the definition of what a cache should do in any case (to remove the current conflict), and let implementation decide.

If you mandate revalidation, it's not just stale; it conforms to the p6 definition of invalidation. Calling it 'stale' will confuse matters.


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 29 July 2010 10:10:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:24 GMT