- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:43:13 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote: > > <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/22> > > In Vancouver, discussion focused on the definition of ETag as a response > header, rather than an entity header; 2616 says: > >> The ETag response-header field provides the current value of the >> entity tag for the requested variant. > > and: >> The response-header fields allow the server to pass additional >> information about the response which cannot be placed in the Status- >> Line. These header fields give information about the server and about >> further access to the resource identified by the Request-URI. >> > > Below, I'll try to summarise my understanding of where we now sit; > please correct me if I haven't got it right. > ... For the record: this exactly matches my understanding since this topic was brought up over two years ago over here. In particular: - E does not apply to Rq - the presence of E in Rs does not necessarily imply that the body sent with PUT was stored octet-by-octet - E does not depend on the request method, just on URI & selecting headers And yes, this needs to be resolved in sync with <http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/69> BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 4 January 2008 14:43:29 UTC