Personally i dont like an extra param, but something in the name: /scripts/myscript_1232134323287.js
On 1/17/08, Matt Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matej, > > A parameter on the url seems like a small price to pay to guarantee that the > client has the correct version of the resource (IMHO). There are other > frameworks which do similar things by default. Is the only reason not to do > it that the url looks a little less clean? > > - Matt > > p.s. - The grid components look nice! (http://www.inmethod.com/) > > On Jan 16, 2008 10:34 AM, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think this would be a reasonable default behavior. Problem is that > > it adds another parameter to resource URL, I wasn't sure that people > > wouldn't mind, so I better left it disabled by default. > > > > -Matej > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
