- From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:07:37 +0100
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi, Sorry for being a bit late with this review. > 3.2. If-None-Match > > If the request would, without the If-None-Match header field, result > in anything other than a 2xx or 304 status code, then the If-None- Should this list also include 412 listed above in the same section? > Match header field MUST be ignored. (See Section 2.4 for a > discussion of server behavior when both If-Modified-Since and If- > None-Match appear in the same request.) > 3.3. If-Modified-Since > > The "If-Modified-Since" header field MAY be used to make a request > method conditional by modification date: if the selected > representation has not been modified since the time specified in this > field, then do not perform the request method; instead, respond as > detailed below. This section doesn't seem to say anything about methods other than GET, yet the text seems to imply that a more general case is also covered "below", yet this section only talks about GET. > 3.4. If-Unmodified-Since > > If the specified date is invalid, the header field MUST be ignored. Here and elsewhere in the document: do you mean syntactic validity, semantic validity (e.g. date in the future are invalid) or both? > 4.1. 304 Not Modified > > If the recipient of a 304 response does not have a cached > representation corresponding to the entity-tag indicated by the 304 > response, then the recipient MUST NOT use the 304 to update its own > cache. If this conditional request originated with an outbound > client, such as a user agent with its own cache sending a conditional > GET to a shared proxy, then the 304 response MAY be forwarded to the > outbound client. This looks strange: an outbound client ... MAY forward the 304 response to the outbound client?
Received on Monday, 16 April 2012 15:07:20 UTC