* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

Ticket #71 (closed design: fixed)

Opened 7 years ago

Last modified 5 years ago

Examples for ETag matching

Reported by: mnot@pobox.com Owned by: julian.reschke@gmx.de
Priority: Milestone: 04
Component: p4-conditional Severity:
Keywords: Cc:
Origin: http://www.w3.org/mid/457164B8.2040203@gmx.de

Description

People seem to be confused about the weak matching function; we should have examples to illustrate it.

Attachments

i71.diff (2.0 KB) - added by julian.reschke@gmx.de 6 years ago.
proposed change for part 3.

Change History

comment:1 Changed 7 years ago by mnot@pobox.com

+--------+--------+-------------------+-----------------+
| ETag 1 | ETag 2 | Strong Comparison | Weak Comparison |
+--------+--------+-------------------+-----------------+
| W/"1"  | W/"1"  | no match          | match           |
|        |        |                   |                 |
| W/"1"  | W/"2"  | no match          | no match        |
|        |        |                   |                 |
| W/"1"  | "1"    | no match          | match           |
|        |        |                   |                 |
| "1"    | "1"    | match             | match           |
+--------+--------+-------------------+-----------------+

comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by mnot@pobox.com

  • Component set to conditional
  • Milestone set to unassigned

comment:3 Changed 7 years ago by fielding@gbiv.com

  • Type changed from design to editorial

comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by julian.reschke@gmx.de

  • Owner set to julian.reschke@gmx.de

Proposal:

1) Replace

" * The strong comparison function: in order to be considered equal, both validators MUST be identical in every way, and both MUST NOT be weak.

  • The weak comparison function: in order to be considered equal, both validators MUST be identical in every way, but either or both of them MAY be tagged as "weak" without affecting the result."

and

" * The strong comparison function: in order to be considered equal, both opaque-tags MUST be identical character-by-character, and both MUST NOT be weak.

  • The weak comparison function: in order to be considered equal, both opaque-tags MUST be identical character-by-character."

This uses "opaque-token" instead of "validator" in the definition of the matching functions.

2) Add the table below.

comment:5 Changed 6 years ago by julian.reschke@gmx.de

  • Type changed from editorial to design
  • Milestone changed from unassigned to 04

Proposal:

1) Replace

" * The strong comparison function: in order to be considered equal, both validators MUST be identical in every way, and both MUST NOT be weak.

  • The weak comparison function: in order to be considered equal, both validators MUST be identical in every way, but either or both of them MAY be tagged as "weak" without affecting the result."

by

" * The strong comparison function: in order to be considered equal, both opaque-tags MUST be identical character-by-character, and both MUST NOT be weak.

  • The weak comparison function: in order to be considered equal, both opaque-tags MUST be identical character-by-character."

This uses "opaque-token" instead of "validator" in the definition of the matching functions.

2) Add the table below.

Changed 6 years ago by julian.reschke@gmx.de

proposed change for part 3.

comment:6 Changed 6 years ago by julian.reschke@gmx.de

  • Status changed from new to closed
  • Resolution set to fixed

Fixed in [298]:

Resolve #71: Clarify matching functions and add examples (closes #71).

comment:7 Changed 5 years ago by julian.reschke@gmx.de

From [610]:

re-add text about how to do the weak match (while resolving #71 it got a bit terse) (related to #71)

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.