- From: Gregory J. Woodhouse <gjw@wnetc.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 21:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Ari Luotonen <luotonen@netscape.com>
- Cc: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
It's probably true that most CGI output is not intended to be cached, but I don't see any a priori reason why CGI output should never be cached. Off-hand, I don't see any reason why the current time can't be sent as the last modified time for the resource. As a practical example, I use CGI to produce indexes to the archives for a mailing list. Generally, digests are generated once a day, and the archive are updated with each digest. Now, if digests were always generated once a day, then it seems natural enough to generate cacheable output with a freshness lifetime of 24 hours. In fact, I've had people read the list exclusively through the web, and not by mail, and so it's quite possible that the same person would visit the site several times during the day. --- gjw@wnetc.com / http://www.wnetc.com/home.html If you're going to reinvent the wheel, at least try to come up with a better one.
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 1997 21:43:28 UTC