- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 11:39:10 -0400
- To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
- Cc: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>
At 11:39 7/25/98 -0700, Jim Gettys wrote: >I've done one scan trying to catch all the Warning usages that should >change... As we talked about, when the warning header is described directly in connection with a cache then it should be "response" and not message as a cache by definition only works on responses. That is, 1xx codes only make sense for response, 2xx codes can be applied both to requests and responses. I don't know if it is of any use to define directions on future codes - I don't like the codes in the first place. Had they been URIs then I could have used them in Mandatory and 118n problems would have been the same as for any other resource. If anybody else would like to do that then feel free! Section 13.1.2 Whenever a cache returns a response that is neither first-hand nor "fresh enough" (in the sense of condition 2 in section 13.1.1), it must attach a warning to that effect, using a Warning response-header. This warning allows clients to take appropriate action The "must" should be a MUST in the paragraph above. "response-header" should be "general-header". In the section a bit further down: HTTP/1.0 caches will cache all Warnings, without deleting the ones in the first category. Warnings that are passed to HTTP/1.0 caches carry an extra warning-date field, which prevents a future HTTP/1.1 recipient from believing an erroneously cached Warning. Change "HTTP/1.0 caches will cache all Warnings" to "HTTP/1.0 caches will cache all Warnings in responses". Change "Warnings that are passed to HTTP/1.0 caches" to "Warnings in responses that are passed to HTTP/1.0 caches" Section 13.5.2 A non-transparent proxy MAY modify or add these fields in a response that does not include no-transform, but if it does so, it MUST add a Warning 114 (Transformation applied) if one does not already appear in the response. Change "in a response" to "in a message" and "if one does not already appear in the response" to "if one does not already appear in the message" Section 14.46 The Warning response-header field is used to carry additional information about the status of a response which may not be reflected by the response status code. This information is typically, though not exclusively, used to warn about a possible lack of semantic transparency from caching operations. Change "The Warning response-header field is used to carry additional information about the status of a response which may not be reflected by the response status code" to "The Warning general-header field is used to carry additional information about the status or transformation of a message which may not be otherwise reflected in the message." Change "This information is typically, though not exclusively, used to warn about a possible lack of semantic transparency from caching operations." to "This information is typically used to warn about a possible lack of semantic transparency from caching operations or of transformations applied to the entity body of the message." Further down Any server or cache may add Warning headers to a response. New Warning headers should be added after any existing Warning headers. A cache MUST NOT delete any Warning header that it received with a response. However, if a cache successfully validates a cache entry, it SHOULD remove any Warning headers previously attached to that entry except as specified for specific Warning codes. It MUST then add any Warning headers received in the validating response. In other words, Warning headers are those that would be attached to the most recent relevant response. Change the whole paragraph to Warning headers can in general be applied to any message, however some specific warn-codes are specific to caches and can only be applied to response messages. New Warning headers should be added after any existing Warning headers. A cache MUST NOT delete any Warning header that it received with a message. However, if a cache successfully validates a cache entry, it SHOULD remove any Warning headers previously attached to that entry except as specified for specific Warning codes. It MUST then add any Warning headers received in the validating response. In other words, Warning headers are those that would be attached to the most recent relevant response. Next paragraph When multiple Warning headers are attached to a response, the user agent SHOULD display as many of them as possible, in the order that they appear in the response. If it is not possible to display all of the warnings, the user agent should follow these heuristics: - Warnings that appear early in the response take priority over those appearing later in the response. - Warnings in the user's preferred character set take priority over warnings in other character sets but with identical warn-codes and warn-agents. I am surprised that none of the GUI folks have complained about this SHOULD. It isn't a protocol requirements and interferes with GUI policies. If we want this paragraph then it SHOULD at least be a lowercase "should". In the paragraph 1XX Warnings that describe the freshness or revalidation status of the response, and so MUST be deleted after a successful revalidation. Add the sentence 1XX warn-codes MAY be generated by a cache only when validating a cached entry. It MUST NOT be generated by clients. Comments? Henrik -- Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, World Wide Web Consortium http://www.w3.org/People/Frystyk
Received on Tuesday, 28 July 1998 11:31:15 UTC