W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 1996


From: Maurizio Codogno <mau@beatles.cselt.stet.it>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 15:01:18 +0200
Message-Id: <199609261301.PAA02583@beatles.cselt.stet.it>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1635
I re-read sections 9.1.1 and 9.1.2, and I can understand the logic
beneath idempotence of GET. I probably broke something on my own pages,
and I will bear the consequences. And I know the difference between
idempotence and no-cacheability.

What I did not understand is, why PUT has to be idempotent.

Isn't there a discrepancy between 9.1.1 and 9.1.2 ? And besides, does
putting twice a file generate different timestamps for it?

ciao, .mau.
Received on Thursday, 26 September 1996 06:09:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:16:20 UTC