W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: getlastmodified changes when?

From: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 19:08:50 +0200
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Message-Id: <F117C988-5C5C-11D6-BBE9-00039384827E@greenbytes.de>
I agree to that and support Jason's wording.

//Stefan

Am Dienstag den, 30. April 2002, um 18:38, schrieb Clemm, Geoff:

> I agree that both the last-modified and entity-tag values SHOULD
> be reserved for use in caching resource content (i.e. what you get
> with GET), and that they SHOULD NOT be used for property value caching.
>
> Cheers,
> Geoff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Crawford [mailto:ccjason@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 11:36 AM
> To: Clemm, Geoff
> Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
> Subject: RE: getlastmodified changes when?
>
>
>
>> 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".
>
> One thing to note... you added "or modification date" in to that.   I'm
> going to start a seperate
> thread for that with this note.   This has also been discussed in the
> following thread:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2001AprJun/0138.html
>
> and two other threads within a month of that .  The issue wasn't 
> resolved.
> I believe the
> discussion was left with the suggestion that someone make a concrete
> proposal.   I'm
> going to make a proposal that is similar to Geoff's but worded a bit
> differently.  It will
> encourage a change to some servers.
>
> "The getlastmodified property SHOULD NOT change as a result of 
> PROPPATCH
> unless that PROPPATCH also causes the GET response to change"
>
> This is not the same as saying that it should only change upon 
> changes to
> the content
> of the underlying (source) resource, but the effect will usually be the
> same.  Implicit
> in this proposal is the suggestion that if some of us want a 
> property that
> tells us about
> property changes, we should define/spec a new property for that.
>
> So now we have a proposal on the floor....  :-)
>
> What do people think?
>
> J.
>
> ------------------------------------------
> Phone: 914-784-7569,   ccjason@us.ibm.com
>
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 13:09:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:00 GMT