- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:10:20 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>, ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > >> On 26 Apr 2015, at 6:49 am, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote: >> >> If search is cacheable when the Conent-Location of the response matches the effective request uri, how does that show that the SEARCH response is not cacheable? > > It is cacheable — in the sense that it can be stored. However, that stored response can only be used to satisfy future GET requests to the same URI — which is probably not what you want. > It definitely is not what we want. The SEARCH response is a not representation of the resource. It's NOT what you'd expect to get back when sending a GET to the same URI. - James > HTTP caching operates upon representations of resource state, which means accessing the contents of the cache is always GET (or HEAD). > > This makes methods that also return things that look like representations difficult to work with — e.g., OPTIONS, PROPFIND. Generally, the better way to do things like this is to make them proper resources, and use links to relate them to the resource they're "talking" about. > > Cheers, > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > > >
Received on Saturday, 25 April 2015 19:11:08 UTC