W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2003

RE: DAV request header, was: 3xx vs RFC2518 vs redirect-ref spec

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 13:52:42 -0700
To: "'Geoffrey M Clemm'" <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <006d01c39a70$c4c3b240$f8cb90c6@lisalap>

If this header can affect caching, then I think we should add

"This header MAY affect caching, therefore this header SHOULD NOT be used
on GET requests where response caching is most important."

Lisa

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Geoffrey M Clemm
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:01 AM
> To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> Subject: Re: DAV request header, was: 3xx vs RFC2518 vs 
> redirect-ref spec
> 
> 
> 
> I see no reason to forbid the value of the Dav request header 
> from affecting cacheable responses, so if we do anything in 
> this regard, I'd do the clarification.
> 
> Cheers,
> Geoff
> 
> Julian wrote on 10/20/2003 10:52:11 AM:
> > 
> > Another thing we'll have to keep in mind is the possible interaction
> between
> > this header and responses that are both cacheable and vary on the 
> > value
> of
> > this request header...
> > 
> > Ideas:
> > 
> > - we could just forbid that (the value of the "Dav" request header 
> > must
> not
> > affect cacheable responses)
> > 
> > - clarify that whenever the "Dav" request header *does* affect a
> cacheable
> > response, the server will have to list in the "Vary" 
> response header.
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 24 October 2003 16:52:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:05 GMT