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

Re: ETags, next call, was: Notes on call from today ...

From: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:34:43 -0500
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org, Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <wsanchez@apple.com>
Message-ID: <OF7F927488.C6C3E2CB-ON852570D6.007BF88C-852570D6.007C038F@us.ibm.com>
+1 for "no".

Julian wrote on 12/13/2005 05:30:32 PM:

> 
> Cullen Jennings wrote:
> > I have still been looking for an answer on a question I asked long ago 
on
> > this. If a client needs a strong ETag, and it gets a weak ETag, should 
the
> > client poll the server until it gets a strong ETag? This seems to be 
the
> > recommendation but no one seem to say "yes" or "no" to this?
> 
> The answer is "no", unless the client happens to know that it talks to a 

> server that indeed upgrades the weak to a strong one later (which in 
> general will not be the case).
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2005 22:36:43 GMT

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