"Etag" is an another very interesting functionality.
Cache-Control and Etag are often used.
Several Webservers have them, despite they have not
implemented all the HTTP1.1 recommendations.
We can even find some documents talking about HTTP
1.0+ to indicate that they've implement partially 1.1.



An another approach would be to let user to add in the
header what they want, and not let Quixote force them
to use "Expires". For example, this is not yet the
case for StaticDir and StaticFile.







--- Graham Fawcett  wrote:
> On 5/17/05, vincent delft 
> wrote:
> > --- Neil Schemenauer  wrote:
> > > Not all Quixote servers speak HTTP/1.1.  I think
> we
> > > should stick to
> > > HTTP/1.0 if possible (the Host header is one
> > > exception).
> >
> > I'm sorry, I don't catch your point. Webservers
> send
> > headers and content to browsers. I'm just asking
> to
> > replace the "expires" by "cache-control".
>
> I think Neil's point is that "Web servers send
> headers and content to
> browsers" according to *specifications*. There are
> two of versions of
> the spec in the real world: HTTP/1.0 and HTTP/1.1.
> The former
> specification does not specify "Cache-control" or
> most other caching
> directives. To be compliant, you cannot send a 1.1
> header from a 1.0
> server. Postel's Law and all of that. (But Neil
> threw "Host" in there
> as a 1.0 retrofit, so we're already muddying the
> waters!)
>
> I reckon that Quixote could be smart enough to
> always do the right
> thing, if told via configuration what version of
> HTTP was in effect.
>
>
Wondering-how-many-http/0.9-servers-are-still-out-there'ly
> yours,
> -- Graham
>




__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail