- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 22:31:50 +0100
- To: Wilfredo Sánchez Vega <wsanchez@wsanchez.net>
- CC: Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Wilfredo Sánchez Vega wrote: > Right. I'd change it so that instead of using a weak etag, append the > string "-potentially-spaztic" or something to the ETag during the first > second and use the same ETag without the prefix after the first second. > Same result as the current implementation, but without implying the > semantics of a weak ETag. Hm, no. A strong ETag allows you to do GET with Range headers, while a weak ETag doesn't. Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 9 December 2005 21:34:19 UTC