- From: Olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 07:51:57 +0900
- To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
Alex, Thanks a lot for these comments. On Wednesday, Jan 29, 2003, at 06:25 Asia/Tokyo, Alex Rousskov wrote: > [about ETag] > The opening statement is technically correct, but the example > violates HTTP rules. Equal ETags do not imply equivalent > resources! ETags have resource-based scope; comparing ETags for > different URLs (different resources) is not defined by HTTP. Ack'd. I'll investigate. > > Guideline 1: Choose URIs wisely > Please note that CHIPs URI itself violates at least checkpoint > 1.2.II as it contains mixed case. You're right, but we have little control over where the NOTE goes. In this case I believe "do what we say, not what we do" was our only option... > Also, checkpoint 1.2.II > contradicts checkpoint 1.2.III since "first letter uppercase" is > also "mixed case". Good point, ack'd. Do you have a suggestion to reword this? > Finally, W3C server probably violates checkpoint 4.1 since it uses a > "301 Moved Permanently" response when redirecting > http://www.w3.org/TR/chips to > http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/NOTE-chips-20030128/. I just checked this with Henri, our webmaster. The 301 is from http://www.w3.org/TR/chips to http://www.w3.org/TR/chips/, which is correct. I agree, though, that our server could follow 5.2.II and serve this with the Content-Location: of the dated version... We've added this to our webmaster "todo" list. Thanks again. Please keep the comments coming, that will help us brew a better next version... :) -- Olivier
Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2003 17:52:00 UTC