- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:13:03 +0100
- To: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- Cc: "'HTTP Working Group'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 28/07/2008, at 6:35 PM, Brian Smith wrote: > > Mark Nottingham wrote: >> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/37 >> >> Roy sort-of proposed deleting "present" in >> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2006OctDec/ >> 0090.html >>> >> >> In addition, I'd propose: >> >> * adding: "When a resource's representations vary, an origin >> server SHOULD include the Vary header even when the selecting >> header(s) are not present; otherwise, caches will use that >> representation inappropriately." > > I think it would be better to say: "For each request URI, an origin > server > SHOULD return the same Vary header field value for every request." > In this > way, the Vary header is not just a response header but a "resource > header". That is exactly how Vary doesn't work, and the interpretation that we're trying to avoid. >> * adding: "Caches MAY canonicalise request headers before >> comparing them for purposes of determining whether they match >> during variant selection." > > Clients, intermediaries, and servers should always be able to > canonicalize > headers in any situation. Putting a specific statement about it here > imples > there are some cases in which canonicalization is not allowed. I > suggest > leaving this part out. Enough people have had questions about this that it's worthwhile calling out explicitly, AFAICT. Others? -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2008 07:13:40 UTC