W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 1997

RE: Globally unique e-tags, if-match on content-ID, etc.

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 00:00:03 -0700
Message-Id: <11352BDEEB92CF119F3F00805F14F48503A157D3@RED-44-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>
To: 'Larry Masinter' <masinter@parc.xerox.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/4400
These are certainly issues of great importance to DAV. In fact you will
find a section entitled "State-Tokens" in the latest DAV draft which
specifies two new headers, if-state-match and if-none-state-match. It
also specifies a syntax for state-tokens but that syntax is being
replaced with a URI.


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Larry Masinter [SMTP:masinter@parc.xerox.com]
> Sent:	Saturday, September 13, 1997 7:57 AM
> To:	http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> Subject:	Globally unique e-tags, if-match on content-ID, etc.
> One of the technical issues that came up in recent discussions
> about "Push" technology is the usefulness, for some applications,
> for a globally unique content-ID. While "content-ID" might be
> a useful header in a response, there's no corresponding request
> header, since the etag is only guaranteed unique relative to 
> the given URL.
> Can 'if-match' be extended to use content-IDs as well as
> ETags? Or, can we add some space of 'globally unique etags'?
> At the same time, there's a desire to have a kind of content-ID
> that is based on MD5 or SHA to allow generation of the content-ID
> from the content-MD5 value, for example, or to have it independently
> generated.
> I don't think these are necessarily action items for HTTP-WG,
> but I thought I'd raise the issues.
> Larry
> -- 
> http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter
Received on Monday, 15 September 1997 00:22:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:03 UTC