Subject: [Bug 14] new requirements on ETags vs property changes

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:35:24 -0700

http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14

[email-masked] changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |major

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

---

From: Elias Sinderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:47:45 -0700

>http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14
Definately a major issue...  :-)

Summary notes from todays conference call:
There are currently servers which both DO and DO NOT change ETags on 
property changes, hence there is a risk in obsoleting existing 
implementations regardless of the path the WG takes on this issue.
Further, there are clear disadvantages to distributed authoring clients 
if an ETag changes due to a property update, without the resource body 
changing.

Jim suggests introducing PTag for property changes, and I agree this 
would be useful, however introducing this into a revision of an existing 
spec will create problems. Julian suggests that this would belong in a 
seperate specification.

Rough concensus reached to use SHOULD NOT with respect to changing ETags 
on property changes - Lisa to make edit...

Hope this captured the gist of the conversation, please feel free to add 
anything that may be useful.

Best,
Elias