- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 10:17:04 +0100
- To: Dan Brotsky <dbrotsky@adobe.com>
- CC: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Dan Brotsky wrote: > ... > In no case does a client ever assume that "the text it sent with the PUT > is what would be retrieved by the GET." That's not what the etag is > for. The etag is to reassure the client that the value on the server > *has not changed since the PUT completed*. No guarantees are issued > that the value doesn't change as part of the PUT; that would be a part > of the PUT semantics for that server and are outside the scope of > WebDAV. > ... Thanks, Dan :-) So let's look at what clients are interested in again: - they want to avoid fetching an ETag after PUT, - in some cases, they want to be able to find out whether the server stored exactly what they sent, - if they interleave PUT and PROPPATCH, they want their ETags to continue to work. I believe all of these things can be accomplish by protocol extensions, and I'll be happy to spec them out. On the other hand, I don't think it would be a good idea to rush them into RFC2518bis, which was supposed to be finished around this time of year (if I may remember). Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 09:18:38 UTC