W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1997

Re: URI -> URL when talking about 'moved ...'

From: <Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 23:11:26 PDT
To: masinter@parc.xerox.com
Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com, spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com
Message-Id: <97May27.231155pdt."17274(3)"@alpha.xerox.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3341
So you're saying that the "if" qualification in

``If the new URI is a location, its URL SHOULD be given by the Location field
in the response.''

is not operative, in the sense that there's no point in asking for the "else"
clause because it will never be exercised?  That is, there SHOULD
(unconditionally!) be a Location field given in the response?
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 1997 23:13:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:20 UTC