W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: [webkit-dev] Accept- & Content-Resolution headers proposal

From: Nicholas Shanks <contact@nickshanks.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:28:34 +0100
Message-Id: <7E522AC1-D72A-4683-930D-9438ED12DE7B@nickshanks.com>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
To: Rob Burns <robburns1@mac.com>, WebKit Development <webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org>
sorry for more spam people :-)
a couple of things i don't have time to write about before i go to  
bed (tis gone 1am here)


http code 300 is what i was wanting, not 406 or making up a new one
	http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.3.1

the "Suggest-Location" param already exists, and is just called  
"Location"
	(same url)

agent-driven negotiation is already suggested by HTTP 1.1:
	http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec12.html
except that:
	1) the format of a 300 response is not defined and in fact doesn't  
make it clear whether UAs should look in the headers or body for the  
list of choices
	2) there seems to be no way to make apache (v1.3) generate a 300  
response, it does server-side negotiation with all the things i tried  
(which is where my new header would apply - make it generate a 300!).
	3) i've never seen a 300 response from any web server in the wild.  
if it's not even implemented, i'm not surprised no client apps do  
their own negotiation.


I am intrigued by what larry just write, and will look at it either  
tomorrow or in 10 days, as am away next week.
i'm sure all the HTTP boffins already knew this and are lookin  
skyward right now. sorry folks!

- Nicholas.




Received on Friday, 8 June 2007 00:28:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:10 GMT