[Ietf-caldav] Last Call comment on Etag requirements in
lisa at osafoundation.org
Tue Jun 20 08:13:44 PDT 2006
Wilfredo, does it make a difference that CalDAV specifies special
ETag behavior only on Calendar Component resource items (not for all
On Jun 19, 2006, at 12:58 PM, Wilfredo Sánchez Vega wrote:
> Sure, OK, so some clients are broken today because they make some
> assumptions that are only valid on some server implementations.
> We know we need a solution; I just don't agree that CalDAV is the
> right place to specify it. I do understand how it's convenient.
> On Jun 19, 2006, at 12:32 PM, Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>> It's worse than that; many client authors *assumed* that to be the
>> case, and implemented and deployed their clients assuming that if
>> the client receives a strong ETag in response to a PUT, it has no
>> further work to do to synchronize that resource. So the deployed
>> base says that *is* the case today. I don't feel our document
>> makes this situation any worse than the deployed base of clients
>> already does.
More information about the Ietf-caldav