Look for info regarding "the major browsers do not support requests with no-store."

[curtisbelt]

mdn/content@2aff7c2#diff-0e775ebf01146f89262a34438d65c3660c6d7884f7423355307210753b3f90e7R284

Note that the major browsers do not support requests with no-store.

This line was added 2 years ago, co-authors @Jxck @hamishwillee @mnot @sideshowbarker.

I cannot find any reference online that backs up this claim. The latest Chrome/Chromium-powered browsers support no-store. I was just curious if anyone has a source on this or more details.

Thank you!

[mnot]

Chrome and Safari don't support request no-store; Firefox does. See https://cache-tests.fyi/#cc-request

That said, the statement is odd; what there really should be is a statement at the top of the request CC section saying that request cache-control is optional, and so not consistently supported.

[curtisbelt]

Oh! I see my mistake... I didn't make the distinction between Request and Response directives.

My use case is for using the no-store directive in the Cache-Control response header, which I see from https://cache-tests.fyi/#cc-response that it's supported across the board.

Thank you for introducing me to that cache testing resource 👍🏻

[Jxck]

In no-cache section above that line said

Browsers usually add no-cache to requests when users are force reloading a page.

so I think I intended to say like

Note that the major browsers do not provide UI for sending requests with no-store.

basically (really basically), browsers sending 3 types of request in user journey. "Navigation", "Reload", and "Force Reload".
And the major browser basically sends "Last-Modified + ETag", "max-age=0", "no-cache" for each.

So this line doesn't intend to mention supporting "no-store" in fetch() or so.

[curtisbelt]

Thank you for your response -- it turns out my original mistake was not catching that I was reading under the "request" directives, when my concern was for "response" directives (which I see is supported just fine).

Marking this as the answer though, since you're the original author of that documentation and have provided additional explanation -- appreciate it!

[Jxck]

I feel like we can remove this line since there are less information. I'll create PR soon.

[Jxck]

#28478