- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 11:46:28 +0200
- To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "'Nevermann, Dr., Peter'" <Peter.Nevermann@softwareag.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault > Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 12:17 AM > To: 'Julian Reschke'; 'Nevermann, Dr., Peter'; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org > Subject: RE: getlastmodified of collections > > > > This is a good point. I was thinking that the GET response to a directory was likely only a > listing of its member files, and then Geoff's idea of getlastmodified would fit this model. Yes. > However there are a number of other possibilities: > > - If the server includes information about a directory's members, that could change. E.g. > File Name Size Last Modified > file1.txt 123k 8/1/2003 > file2.txt 124k 8/2/2003 > A server that did a listing like this in response to a GET ought to change its directory's > getlastmodified value whenever the content changed. Obviously that might include a PUT > operation to a child as well as the other operations listed. Correct. > - If the server returns a file like "index.html" in response to a GET for a directory, then > possibly the 'getlastmodified' property value for the directory should be that of > the index.html file. Yes. > How many HTTP/WebDAV clients are there out there that do caching/synch based on the > Last-Modified header or the 'getlastmodified' property? I am guessing there are quite > a few because from what I've seen clients can't rely on ETag support in Web/WebDAV servers. I think most user agents will cache using the Last-Modified *header* when no ETag is present. I however doubt that there are lots of WebDAV-aware clients that actually use DAV:getlastmodified to cache (they'd still need to GET the content, in which case they SHOULD use the "Last-Modified" header returned by GET). In general, all we can say reliably is that the Last-Modified date should change when the GETtable content changes. Now the real issue here is: is the timestamp allowed to change even though the content didn't. We ruled that out for property changes (which I think is wrong), but seem to propose it for other non-content changes here. See also <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JulSep/0122.html>, part 2. Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Saturday, 6 September 2003 05:46:43 UTC