- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 11:49:55 -0800
- To: Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <wsanchez@apple.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
I hadn't thought that a client could use weak etags at all for authoring. I had started from considering the cases of a JPG or a Photoshop file or a Word document. What does a weak ETag mean for those documents? If I edit a Word document on a WebDAV server and all I do is fix a couple inconsistent fonts and a space or two, one might think that the weak ETag need not change -- but I would not find the system very usable if these changes were lost on a subsequent update. Lisa On Nov 29, 2005, at 11:09 AM, Wilfredo Sánchez Vega wrote: > Agreed. If you can only guarantee semantic equivalence and not > byte-for-byte equivalence between GETs, you have to must weak etags > according to HTTP/1.1. > > A weak etag, as per rfc2616, should sufficient for CalDAV and > accurately reflects what's going on in the server if it is generating > the iCalendar dynamically. I don't see why a client can't use that to > do sync just fine. All you care about is whether the etag changes, > not whether it's strong or weak, unless you actually need > byte-for-byte replication, but I don't know why you would. > > -wsv > > > On Nov 29, 2005, at 1:24 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > >>>> On the other hand, a server that implements RFC2616/RFC2518 would >>>> just use weak ETags, allowing to reformat the content as long the >>>> semantics stay the same. >>> How do weak ETags solve this? What can a client really rely on if >>> the weak ETag is the same, or different? Do you believe a client >>> could rely on weak ETags to do synchronization? Wouldn't we need >>> restrictions on >> >> Yes, I would think so. >> >>> what changes could be allowed before the weak ETag had to change in >>> order to use weak ETags? >> >> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#rfc.section.3.11>: >> >> "A "weak entity tag," indicated by the "W/" prefix, MAY be shared by >> two entities of a resource only if the entities are equivalent and >> could be substituted for each other with no significant change in >> semantics. A weak entity tag can only be used for weak comparison." >
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2005 20:46:56 UTC