[8315] in www-talk@info.cern.ch
Re: caching dilemma
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kee Hinckley)
Wed May 31 05:57:27 1995
Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 05:41:09 +0500
Errors-To: procmaster@www19.w3.org
Reply-To: nazgul@utopia.com
From: nazgul@utopia.com (Kee Hinckley)
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www10.w3.org>
At 10:51 PM 5/30/95, Koen Holtman wrote:
>I've been writing on a draft spec commentary which suggests that the
>expires header may be used to allow control cacheability of 302 (and
>300) responses.
I wonder if we should move away from the expires vs. cache issue and just
explicitly disabling the cache. Netscape does this already with a pragma
directive - with dynamic documents (say an order form where you don't want
the history to point at an old version) I use both that expires and the
nocache directive just to be sure.
Kee Hinckley Utopia Inc. - Cyberspace Architects=81 617/721-6100
nazgul@utopia.com http://www.utopia.com/
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
