- From: Michael Toomim <toomim@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 02:36:43 -0700
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Julian: > Michael Toomim: >> ... >> The main problem with ETag, though, is that it marks *unique content* >> rather than *unique time*. If you mutate the state of the resource from >> "foo" to "bar" and then back to "foo", you'll revert to the same ETag, >> even though this is at a different point in time. This breaks >> collaborative editing algorithms. >> ... > > It doen't have to be implemented that way. For instance, AFAIR, > Subversion just uses the version number as Etag, and that's just fine. Ah, good catch! We do need a semantic for "a point in time", but it's true that instead of introducing a new "Version" header, we could also introduce a header or parameter syntax that constrains the meaning of the ETag header. However, ETag would also need to support a list of strings, instead of a single string, to represent merge versions from time to time.
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2024 09:36:49 UTC