RE: I-D ACTION:draft-whitehead-http-etag-00.txt from Larry Masinter on 2006-03-06 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from January to March 2006)

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 21:15:46 -0800
To: "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "'HTTP Working Group'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-id: <000001c640dd$069b50f0$e6f0070a@corp.adobe.com>

At one time (perhaps 4 years ago?) Jim Gettys offered to spin
a version of the HTTP spec with the Errata included. I
don't know how big a job it would be.

If the server is doing rewrites of the data, the server
could return a 'weak' ETag. It's up to the server to
decide what is equivalent.

But it would be unreasonable to return a strong ETag
for a body that had never before 'crossed the wire',
and certainly an incompatible change.


Larry

Received on Monday, 6 March 2006 05:16:02 UTC