> > So if we want to avoid confusing clients that want to interoperate > > with those implementations, we probably can at most say that > > "PROPPATCH SHOULD NOT modify the etag or modification date". > Sounds good. So then an ETAG change on a resource indicates to a > client that the GET response *MIGHT* have changed. Please excuse the other distracting comments in my note. I support the text Geoff provided about etag above. Although not complete statement, I think it's up to the HTTP spec to clarify beyond what Geoff said. I'll add this as a todo item on the issues list unless someone protests. ------------------------------------------ Phone: 914-784-7569, ccjason@us.ibm.comReceived on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 12:11:37 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:00 GMT