caching-patch V0.2.1 (Was: Re: caching-patch V0.2.0)

[Tobias Anton]

On Friday 30 August 2002 00:01, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> You should have noticed when you tested your changes.
Right. That's why I called it 0.2.1. Thanks for the pointer, anyway.

> > The need for relative expire dates is that the _last_ page which has
> > loaded an image should be able to specify a relative expire date for the
> > image, not the first one. And this expire date should respect the fact
> > that the image is older than the page itself.
>
> I don't see a need for that. The image is likely to already have an expire
> date set in that case.
I simply want to be able to update an existing expire date.

In the version i've posted, only increasing the expire date takes place (which 
is good for the perceived browsing performance), but I'm working on an 
application here which also needs support for lowering expire dates.

> > Also, I want to make it possible to update the expire time via
> > javaScript.
>
> Is that used by other browsers?
No. But that's not a reason not to implement it, though.
After all, I've made a patch and did not ask you to implement it for me.

And a javascript statement like metaElement.setAttribute("expires", "0"); is 
perfectly legal, it just doesn't have any (wanted) side effects in other 
browsers.
But never mind, i'm not finished with that javascript thing anyway.


I'd just like to know how you think to implement that flag that prevents cache 
entries from receiving a new expire date?

Tobias