- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 21:37:36 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
Grey Hodge wrote: > > How would anything people do regarding their site's organizational structure > affect cacheability in any way? I can't see any manner in which this would be > an issue. Yes it would break existing cached copies, but so does any update of > a page currently. > Given that HTTP 1.1 Vary: header support is patchy, at best, if one wants a content negotiated page to be cached, and in particularly to be cached in shared caches, you must give it a unique name, based just on the URL, and you must respond to the negotiated URL with an end to end redirect to the negotiated version. -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 20:37:44 UTC