W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

PATCH and ETags

From: Pablo Castro <Pablo.Castro@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:25:22 -0700
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B61A7A087BA4AB4FB95694FC184A111C4976EEC711@NA-EXMSG-C116.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
At was looking the current draft of PATCH (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dusseault-http-patch-14) and noticed that it currently discusses conflicts only in the context of strong ETags:

"Clients wishing to apply a patch document to a known entity can first acquire the strong ETag of the resource to be modified, and use that Etag in the If-Match header on the PATCH request to verify that the resource is still unchanged.  If a strong ETag is not available for a given resource, the client can use If-Unmodified-Since as a less-reliable safeguard."

Given the update that went into HTTPbis last year around allowing weak ETags on PUT/DELETE [1], shouldn't this spec also allow weak ETags on PATCH? I understand that the sentence above doesn't say that clients MUST use strong ETags, but the way it's spelled out certainly pushes in that direction.


[1] http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/116/i116.diff
Received on Friday, 12 June 2009 23:26:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:19 UTC