we had a long debate on this and the fact of the matter is that we must honor 'cache-control: no-cache' on back/forward. this is unfortunate because the spec would allow us to not do this, but unfortunately many important web servers depend on this behavior, and would block mozilla from accessing their web servers if we didn't implement back/forward in this manner.
darin Jonas J�rgensen wrote: > Bradley Baetz wrote: > >>On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 11:49:21 +0100, Jonas J�rgensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>Darin Fisher wrote: >>> >>>>Back/Forward should honor <meta> tags that specify the equivalent of >>>>'Cache-control: no-cache' If not, then it's a bug. >>>> >>>It should not! The HTTP/1.1 spec says: >>> >>> >><snip> >> >>I agree, and I don't think that what darin is saying is correct. I haven't >>tested, recently, however. Back/forward should not talk to the server with >>no-cache, IIRC. One thing we don't do is restore form elemnts on >>back/forward with no-cache, though, mainly for compatability with IE. >> >>For no-store, we do not keep it for session history. Whilst the spec says >>that we can, sites expect that we don't. These sites don't want people to >>be able to go back to view any username and password data saved in session >>history. >> > > The spec doesn't say that we can - it says that we SHOULD. > > /Jonas >
