zahid mohammed wrote: > If something was fundamentally wrong then why would it work in "FIREFOX". > Perhaps because Firefox is less fundamentally broken than IE? > And moreover these two printlns are giving the same result in Firefox but > not in IE i.e after clicking next these are printing the next page's first > element. I am in the process of using HTTPWatch. I'll let u guys know the > result later. > What do you mean by "first element?" Those printlns are half-way through the source you posted; there is quite a bit of HTML before them.
I should rephrase my belief: obviously there is different behavior under IE, but I'm quite skeptical that it's an issue with caching insofar as the headers you are sending are correct and you are sending a cache-busting unique URL parameter. We use both techniques (and have for a long time) with zero issues across "all" browsers. I still believe that there is either more going on under IE than you suspect with regards to a proxy, a cache, something, somewhere in the request chain. I would recommend you test w/ a different version of IE6 and see if the problem goes away; if it does then obviously that drop of IE is significantly broken. I would also examine your entire request processing chain, and create a standalone test case without all the extra stuff to make it easier to track down the problem to see if it really _is_ an IE-specific caching bug or if it's somewhere else in the chain. Dave --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
