- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:05:57 -0700
- To: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- Cc: "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "'Lisa Dusseault'" <lisa.dusseault@gmail.com>, "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@mnot.net>, "'HTTP Working Group'" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Oct 19, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Brian Smith wrote: > Julian Reschke wrote: >> So my proposal would be to stay silent on this, and let the base spec >> define it. > > I agree, but IMO, there should *never* be a fallback to Last-Modified > because Last-Modified only has 1-second resolution. If the server > supports > PATCH then it can definitely provide an ETag. 1-second resolution is as good as nanosecond resolution as soon as that second is history, and in practice both are useless for tagging dynamic content that is generated during a response. Using last-modified as a fallback is always better than not using any conditional at all. ....Roy
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 00:06:26 UTC