- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 21:03:45 +0100 (MET)
- To: mogul@pa.dec.com (Jeffrey Mogul)
- Cc: masinter@parc.xerox.com, http-caching@pa.dec.com
Jeffrey Mogul: > > [Larry masinter:] > It's a simplification to say that as soon as any one piece of > information associated with a URI becomes stale, all of the rest of > the information should become stale too. I agree. And, at least for URI header based content negotiation, it would be a very expensive simplification to make as far as caching is concerned. > If we make that simplification, 'freshness' applies to "the URI's > information" in general, rather than any particular piece of it. > >The problem that Koen points out is that this is not easily done, This is not the problem I wanted to point out. The problem I want to point out is that the thing that is done, whatever it is, is not easily defined in the spec. >because a simple implementation of the variant-ID scheme allows >repeated requests with one set of request headers to continually >update the freshness information that applies to a different >set of headers. For the record, I don't think that an implementation that does allow continual updates it is that much more simple than an implementation that does not allow them. >-Jeff Koen.
Received on Thursday, 15 February 1996 20:20:00 UTC