- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:16:45 +0000 (UTC)
On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Robert Sayre wrote: > > Basically, I think offline caches should respect the Vary: HTTP header, > and maybe more. Applications will need to do this right anyway, if they > want to function correctly in the presence of ISP HTTP proxies (AOL, > TMobile, etc), corporate firewalls, and server-side stuff like Citrix > Netscalers. The spec currently requires the "old" cache to be used as an HTTP cache with HTTP caching semantics obeyed, when updating. On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Robert Sayre wrote: > > Yes, I should have mentioned that I don't think an Offline API will be > able to handle Cache-Control:private stuff better than other proxies > unless it reinvents other HTTP caching mechanisms. How does this compare to what the spec says today? On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Robert Sayre wrote: > > Here are some examples: > http://www.djangobook.com/en/beta/chapter14/#cn125 > http://webmaster.info.aol.com/vary.html > http://oregonstate.edu/~hopsonro/2006/10/01/internet-explorer-fails-to-explore-internet/ > http://www.somebits.com/weblog/tech/modgzipMSIECache.html > > So, there you have it. mod_rewrite, mod_gzip, django, and AOL are > pretty popular. And IE is kinda broken. It's not clear to me what I'm supposed to do with these. :-) -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2007 16:16:45 UTC