W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: [Fwd: Re: PUT vs strong ETags]

From: Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <wsanchez@wsanchez.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 16:21:24 -0800
Message-Id: <78B9630F-1BD1-4301-B50B-2CA249CFCD90@wsanchez.net>
Cc: Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On Dec 8, 2005, at 12:50 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> But with the current algorithm, the server can't return a strong  
> ETag, unless it blocks updates of that content for one second. That  
> may be unacceptable for some resources.

   Why couldn't it?  Just append a suffix or prefix?  What HTTPd does  
right now is use the same ETag string but prefixes it with 'W/' to  
make it weak.  This accomplishes the goal of making the first-second  
etag different, but I think it should do that without making the tag  
weak, which implies something that isn't the case.

	-wsv
Received on Friday, 9 December 2005 00:21:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:11 GMT