Re: Cache-Control: no-store

On 12/01/2011 09:18 PM, Christian Biesinger wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Bjarne<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>
>> It doesn't seem like we handle "no-store" on requests
>> - do we want to do that? (Rfc2616 explicitly allows it.)
>
> Keep in mind that RFC 2616 often means proxy servers when it talks
> about caches. I don't think it makes any sense to let necko handle a
> Cache-Control request header, because this will be application
> generated, and the INHIBIT_CACHING header is a much easier way to
> specify that. Do you have any specific use case for this in mind?

By "application-generated" I assume you mean the necko-client?

I was thinking about using it from content on an XmlHttpRequest.
Cannot point to a concrete application, but I can imagine that
it may be useful for a web-developer to ensure a resource is
not cached..?