W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1998

Re: Comments on draft HTTP/1.1 spec, v3

From: David W. Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
To: Dave Kristol <dmk@bell-labs.com>
Cc: "Adam M. Donahue" <adam@cyber-guru.com>, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com, http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980501090546.16585D-100000@shell1.aimnet.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/97

On Fri, 1 May 1998, Dave Kristol wrote:

> That leads me to my own question:  If there's an error on a HEAD
> request, should the server return an entity, or just the headers. 
> (Apparently the latter.)  Example:
> HEAD / HTTP/1.1
> <CRLF>
> There's no Host header, so the server responds "400 Bad Request".  With,
> or without, entity?

The only reliable answer is without. But beyond that, the spec is pretty
clear.  Same as GET except for no message-body. So if the client wants
to know why
   GET / HTTP/1.1
would have failed, it must try a GET.

The flaw in the HEAD request design is that it should have returned its
result as an entity rather than as a simple modified GET response. But
that change is too late.

Dave Morris
Received on Friday, 1 May 1998 09:17:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:22 UTC