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

Re: Etag-on-write, draft -04

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 17:19:27 +0100
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Cc: "Roy T.Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <wsanchez@wsanchez.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-Id: <1165767567.11775.66.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
fre 2006-12-08 klockan 18:06 -0800 skrev Lisa Dusseault:

> If a server doesn't return an ETag at all in response to PUT , isn't
> the client likely to assume that the server wants it to use the
> Last-Modified value instead?  In which case today's clients will all
> assume they already have the content (what they PUT)  and never
> download what the server actually stored.

Well.. the Last-Modified in that scenario will by definition be weak
unless it was provided by the client and preserved by the server.

Specs is quite clear on the fact that clients can not safely assume
octet equality with a weak condition.


Received on Sunday, 10 December 2006 16:19:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:40 UTC