- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 08:13:44 -0700
- To: Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <wsanchez@apple.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, ietf@ietf.org, Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>, CalDAV DevList <ietf-caldav@osafoundation.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Wilfredo, does it make a difference that CalDAV specifies special ETag behavior only on Calendar Component resource items (not for all HTTP resources)? lisa On Jun 19, 2006, at 12:58 PM, Wilfredo Sánchez Vega wrote: > Sure, OK, so some clients are broken today because they make some > assumptions that are only valid on some server implementations. > > We know we need a solution; I just don't agree that CalDAV is the > right place to specify it. I do understand how it's convenient. > > -wsv > > > On Jun 19, 2006, at 12:32 PM, Lisa Dusseault wrote: > >> It's worse than that; many client authors *assumed* that to be the >> case, and implemented and deployed their clients assuming that if >> the client receives a strong ETag in response to a PUT, it has no >> further work to do to synchronize that resource. So the deployed >> base says that *is* the case today. I don't feel our document >> makes this situation any worse than the deployed base of clients >> already does. >
Received on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 15:13:56 UTC