Re: Major errors in Caching and Cache-Control

>I agree, no-transform should exist (and I see no reason to forbid 
>transformation with HTTP).

You mean other than the fact that it blows semantic transparency out the window?

How about we go ahead and leave no-transform in, but include a Note: below
it that includes a statement to the effect: "Although HTTP does not
currently allow intermediary proxies to transform responses on their way to
the requestor, future versions of HTTP may allow such behavior under certain
circumstances, and the no-transform directive is included now in
anticipation of such behavior."

At least, that was what I was going to say until received Benjamin Franz's
message while typing this.  The more I think about it, the more I agree with
the sentiment below:

>If this allowed at all, it should be in the affirmative mode: 
>transform-allowed. The default without question should be no content
>transformations allowed unless explicitly stated otherwise. At no point
>should intermediates be allowed to transform content unless I
>affirmatively give them permission to do so.

Daniel DuBois, Software Animal
  Q: What'd the Zen Buddist say to the N.Y. hot dog vendor?
  A: Make me one with everything.   

Received on Wednesday, 5 June 1996 13:42:26 UTC