You may be mistaking cause and effect. The ?_=1255309685187 query string isn't a token to specify how long something should be cached. It's a random number used as a "cachebuster" when jQuery makes an Ajax request. Adding the random number to the URL makes it a different URL each time, so the browser has to request a fresh copy of the file.
So it seems likely that the presence of this query string is forcing the 200 status, not the other way around. But as I mentioned in my other reply, none of this should be happening if you load jquery-*.js with a <script> tag. The browser doesn't add a random cachebuster to the URL when you do that. It just takes the URL you give it. You must be loading a second copy of jQuery with an Ajax request, or some such thing. If you could post a link to a test page, it would be a lot easier to guess what is going on here. :-) -Mike On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Bob <baconeater...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I have jQuery UI Tabs which load their content via AJAX. About once > every 15 times when the entire page is loaded (not just XHR), things > fail and I don't see the proper content in the tab. The jQuery > executes without error, but the page display is wrong. > > Fiddler showed me that when things fail I also see that jQuery.js and > jQuery-ui.js are both sent to the browser in full (~100kB). Normally, > a page load results in HTTP status code 304 for both of those files, > they're not re-downloaded, and the page displays properly. When the > status code is 200 and fresh copies of jQuery/UI are sent, things > fail. > > I notice this most often in IE8, but that's because I use it for web > development. I have seen it in Firefox, but for some reason I can't > reproduce it now. > > Fiddler shows that the HTTP request asks for: > > GET /Scripts/jquery-1.3.2.min.js?_=1255309685187 HTTP/1.1 > > I can't figure out what the ?_=1255309685187 is for, but I'm guessing > it's a token to indicate for how long the file should be cached. > > Since I can't reproduce the problem in Firefox right now, I don't know > what Firebug says. > > Any insight would be appreciated. >
