Oh well, I though I was helping but now I know better. I promise not to do it again.
-----Original Message----- From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 24 October 2004 10:16 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Cache flush James Holmes wrote: > <cfheader name="cache-control" value="no-cache"> > > You could also use the "expires" header, which is in fact preferred According to RFC 2616, section 14.9.3 the max-age directive in the Cache-Control header overrules the Expires header. So I would argue that using the Cache-Control header is in fact preferred. > <cfheader name="expires" value="-1"> Sending invalid headers is most definitely not preferred. See RFC 2616, section 14.21 for the allowed values of the Expired header. > Browser docs have more info e.g. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q234067/ Why refer to outdated browser documentation when the standard is readily available? (MS may say the information in KB article 234067 was reviewed in July, but if they did somebody failed to notice that that KB article is based on a 5 year old draft of the HTTP RFC instead of the final version.) Jochem ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Sams Teach Yourself Regular Expressions in 10 Minutes by Ben Forta http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=40 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:182447 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
