Re: last-seen

• Mail folder: WWW Talk Jan 94-present
• Next message: Gary Adams - Sun Microsystems Labs BOS: "Re: If-Modified-Since and 304"
• Previous message: Kevin Altis: "Re: If-Modified-Since and 304"
• Maybe in reply to: ellson@hotsand.att.com: "Re: last-seen"
• Reply: ellson@hotsand.att.com: "Re: last-seen"

Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 1994 20:42:17 --100
Message-id: <9403101937.AA11612@freya.let.rug.nl>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: bert@let.rug.nl
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: last-seen
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Length: 1066

 |> b) is the date in GMT?
 |
 |Don't care.
[...]
 |The receiving cache should not attempt to understand the
 |semantics of the "Last-modified" date.  It should be treated as a
 |tag provided by the server that the server can match against when it
 |is sent back in the "If-Modified-Since" field.

But presumably the requesting program only asks for the document if
the version it has is expired. That means it must have interpreted the
date & time. Isn't it better then to let the receiving cache generate
a valid date & time from its internal representation, instead of
keeping the original date string around?


-- 
                     _________________________________
                    / _   Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl>  |
           ()       |/ \  Alfa-informatica,           |
            \       |\_/  Rijksuniversiteit Groningen |
             \_____/|     Postbus 716                 |
                    |     9700 AS GRONINGEN           |
                    |     Nederland                   |
                    \_________________________________|