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

#402: Comparison function for If-Match and If-None-Match

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 14:37:31 +1100
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BCB8C7DC-CB92-47AB-B800-A175608D6D02@mnot.net>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/402>

On 19/11/2012, at 7:33 AM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:

>>> 2) In the definitions of If-Match and If-None-Match, we don't specify whether
>> the weak or strong comparison function is to be used when these validations
>> actually occur, although we spend a lot of text on when to use weak vs. strong
>> ETags themselves.
>>> 
>>> Now, you might say that an origin server can decide whether to use the weak
>> or strong function, but an intermediary or client cache doesn't have license to do
>> weak comparison, and could cause a lot of trouble if it did. AFAICT we don't
>> specify this, but I think we should.
> 
> The weak ETag response *is* the license.  
>> 
>> I propose we specify that proxy and client caches MUST use the strong
>> comparison function with If-Match and If-None-Match.
> 
> Why gut the intent of weak ETags?

OK, makes sense. Any issue with documenting them as using the weak comparison function?

Regards,

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2012 03:37:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 November 2012 03:38:00 GMT