W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: #337: Field names in cache-control header arguments

From: Henrik Nordström <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2012 03:33:26 +0100
Message-ID: <1330742006.1807.106.camel@home.hno.se>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
lör 2012-03-03 klockan 11:22 +1100 skrev Mark Nottingham:
> So, it seems like we have three options:
> 
> 1. leave it alone.
> 
> 2. align the language in no-cache with that in private.
> 
> 3. deprecate the semantics of these values (but still allow them syntactically).
> 
> 
> Personally, I'm in favour of #3; I love using esoteric features of caching, but this one has never been useful IMO.

They have good use for site tracking cookies. If sites start using them
caches are likely to follow.

My preference is 2 or maybe 1. Original 2616 wording in no-cache is not
very confusing imho even if the validation part is practically nonsense.

Regards
Henrik
Received on Saturday, 3 March 2012 02:33:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:56 GMT