- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 10:19:51 +1000
- To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
That seems like a different issue. On 06/04/2008, at 8:25 AM, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > > tor 2008-04-03 klockan 13:17 +1100 skrev Mark Nottingham: > >> My reading is that we think that no change is necessary here. > > Not sure. It would make sense to generalize the HEAD invalidation to > also apply to GET responses. i.e. copy the text from HEAD to GET as > well. There is a whole family of uncachable responses, and the result > things can get very surprising if caches do not invalidate the older > copy when the resource has obviously changed even if the current > representation can not be cached.. > > But no-store in itself is not a parameter to that decision, only the > fact that the response is significantly different from the cached > copy. > > And it's not about caches deleting the cached copy, only > invalidating it > (threat it as stale on future requests). > > Regards > Henrik > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2008 00:20:27 UTC