<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: HttpWatch Version 6.0</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.httpwatch.com/2008/09/15/httpwatch-version-60/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.httpwatch.com/2008/09/15/httpwatch-version-60/#utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=httpwatch-version-60</link>
	<description>News, articles and all things HttpWatch</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:31:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: IE,FF客户端浏览器缓存机制 &#38;&#38; 服务器设置的expires, Cache-Control，no-cache，no-store机制 &#171; 西奥气昂</title>
		<link>http://blog.httpwatch.com/2008/09/15/httpwatch-version-60/comment-page-1/#comment-28418</link>
		<dc:creator>IE,FF客户端浏览器缓存机制 &#38;&#38; 服务器设置的expires, Cache-Control，no-cache，no-store机制 &#171; 西奥气昂</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 15:43:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.httpwatch.com/?p=161#comment-28418</guid>
		<description>[...] 现在HttpWatch 6.0支持Firefox了,我们想探讨一下Firefox在处理缓存上与IE有些什么不同.设置较长过期时间的使用方式(上面第二条)仍可以直接用于Firefox,但配置1在两者之间还是存在细微差别的. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 现在HttpWatch 6.0支持Firefox了,我们想探讨一下Firefox在处理缓存上与IE有些什么不同.设置较长过期时间的使用方式(上面第二条)仍可以直接用于Firefox,但配置1在两者之间还是存在细微差别的. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

