Re: Summary of ETag related issues in RFC2518bis

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote on 12/21/2005 11:07:00 AM:

> Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:
> > Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote on 12/21/2005 10:02:23 
AM:
> >  > 2) It seems to me that we can't rule out that servers touch the 
ETag
> >  > upon PROPPATCH (for instance, because they are indeed updating 
metadata
> >  > in the file content, such as with XMP). In which case telling the 
server
> >  > to return the new ETag upon PUT seems to be a very good idea.
> > 
> > Did you mean, return the new ETag upon PROPPATCH?
> 
> Yep. Thanks for the correction :-)

In that case, yes, I agree.

Also note that there is no issue wrt PUT-content vs. GET-content for
PROPPATCH, so that happily that issue does not arise for a PROPPATCH
etag (:-).

Cheers,
Geoff