W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: Etag-on-write, 4rd attempt (== IETF draft 03), was: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-etag-on-write-03.txt

From: Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 20:35:06 +0100
Message-Id: <866D48F4-BA20-4AE9-8AAE-F345B60A1A58@opengroupware.org>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

On Nov 6, 2006, at 20:18, Wilfredo Sánchez Vega wrote:
>   CalDAV is a prime example of where weak ETags are appropriate.   
> If the underlying data store isn't iCalendar, and the server needs  
> to render iCalendar data every time a resource is requested, it's  
> entirely possible that the iCalendar data is semantically but not  
> binary equal every time.  Yes, you can make sure your iCalendar  
> generation is deterministic, but if you change the software, you  
> need to change the strong ETags for every resource on your server  
> along with it.  That's inane.


However, if this is insane, don't we need to extend if-match to allow  
for weak etags? That is, remove this sentence in rfc2616 14.24:
   A server MUST use the strong comparison function (see section 13.3.3)
   to compare the entity tags in If-Match.

Helge Hess
Received on Monday, 6 November 2006 19:35:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:13:28 UTC