Re: IMS instead of "reload"

From: Gregory Maxwell <>
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 08:26:58 -0400 (EDT)

On Sat, 26 Jul 1997, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

> After giving this some seconds of thought, it seems like a bad idea. If
> a object is replaced with a older copy of the same size then there is no
> way to refresh it.
> But such an action is of course a major error by the provider...

 Would it be so bad to have the newer rather then the current?.. Would it
be so hard to impliment a counter such that a second refresh with
"nocache" does a unconditional reload rather then a IMS? This would turn
the refresh button into a "Newer?" button..
Received on Sat Jul 26 1997 - 06:28:56 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:35:50 MST