It's hypothetical. It says "*if* the header *would have* been sent in a 200 response to the same request". I can know what Tomcat would have done, because I've seen what it *does* do with requests that are identical. In my test case, Tomcat *would have* included an ETag header *if* it responded 200 (because that's what it always does when it responds 200), therefore it *must* include an ETag header when it responds with a 304. -- Len
On 5/19/07, Rashmi Rubdi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I might be wrong but I have a few doubts.... On 5/19/07, Len Popp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think you've got that wrong. > > 1. Spec says: > "The response MUST include the following header fields: ... - ETag > and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent in a 200 > response to the same request" By *same request* , I think you are saying that the request was sent from the same browser instance. So on first load of the static resource http://localhost:8080/tomcat.gif , the Http Status is 200 On second load (when browser is refreshed), but the static resource is now cached and so the Http Status is 304. But HTTP is stateless, how will the server know about the *same request* ? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it is my understanding that when the browser is refreshed , a new request is sent hence, it is not the *same request* . > 2. ETag header *was* sent in a 200 response to the same request. (See > the header logs I posted earlier.) > > 3. Therefore, the 304 response must include the ETag. > (I'm pretty sure that's right, it seems straightforward to me.) > -- > Len -Regards Rashmi --------------------------------------------------------------------- To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
