On Sep 3, 1:40 pm, Wes Gamble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John,
>
> Thanks for the quick response.
>
> John J Barton wrote:
> >> I've read a very long thread that goes into all this detail about
> >> pulling responses from cache and what have you.
>
> >> I have very basic questions around this:
>
> >> 1) Why is a double POST required in the first place, at the most basic
> >> level?
>
> > To show you the response to a POST. We have no other way to obtain
> > the response.
>
> Not trying to be dense, but why not? I read 9.5 of RFC 2616, but I
> haven't gotten any insight into why the response can't be obtained.
Sorry, the RFC was maybe an answer to a question you were not asking.
The RFC just says POST maybe cache in some cases.
The response can be obtained. It can be obtained by requesting it
from the server using the same protocol as the page. Which is what we
do. Which causes a second POST because the page already did one.
The point is that the response obtained by the page is not available
to Firebug unless it happens to be cached. But it might not be cached
for lots of reasons. So in all of those cases we don't have a response
to show you. But you want it. So we go and get another copy from the
server to show you. Then you are unhappy because we double POSTed to
get it. Either way we lose.
>
> Wes
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
