- From: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:36:17 -0500
- To: "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@mnot.net>, "'Henrik Nordstrom'" <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- Cc: "'HTTP Working Group'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Proposed text:
>
> """
> By default, the freshness model [ref] does not apply to history
> mechanisms. If the entity is still in storage, a history
> mechanism SHOULD display it even if the entity has expired,
> unless the user has specifically configured the agent to refresh
> expired history documents.
>
> This is not to be construed to prohibit the history mechanism from
> telling the user that a view might be stale, or from honoring
> cache directives (e.g., Cache-Control: no-store).
> """
Why not just:
A client MAY or MAY NOT use the freshness model [ref] when
implementing a history mechanism.
Like I said before, it doesn't make sense to talk about client UI
in this specification, since client UI designers don't care what
this specification has to say about UI issues anyway. The less said,
the better.
Besides, "SHOULD display" doesn't make sense considering the client
might not have a display, and/or there are many reasons why it might
feel it MUST/SHOULD NOT present an item besides the one particular
setting you mentioned (for example, private browsing settings,
anti-time-wasting utilities, etc.).
Regards,
Brian
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2009 02:36:45 UTC