Thomas Broyer wrote: > 2006/3/23, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> One approach that I've taken in our server implementation is to use >> Last-Modified / If-Modified-Since HTTP headers to provide a kind of >> sync'ing mechanism. Specifically, when a client requests the APP feed >> using a If-Modified-Since header, the server will return ONLY those >> entries that have been modified since the specified date. If no entries >> have been modified, the client will receive the expected 304 Not >> Modified status response. > > Hmm, not sure this is not an abuse of those headers… > It was > The "If-Modified-Since" section of HTTP/1.1 reads: > b) If the variant has been modified since the If-Modified-Since > date, the response is exactly the same as for a normal GET. > > If it had been that simple easy, there wouldn't have been a need for > RFC3229/feed ;-) >
Hey, I never said I *wasn't* abusing the headers ;-) Can you say serendipitous hack? ;-) What we're doing may not be 100% per spec, but it doesn't seem to cause any problems either... other than some nominal wierdness in feed readers that support conditional gets but don't keep a feed history (like Firefox Live Bookmarks). In other words, assuming that some offenses are more egregious than others, this is kind of like a rolling stop through a four way intersection in the middle of the desert when there aren't any other vehicles around. - James
