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

Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-http-patch-08, was: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-dusseault-http-patch-08.txt]

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:25:06 +0200
Message-ID: <46AF7E82.3010105@gmx.de>
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
CC: jasnell@us.ibm.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org

Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> 
> We could certainly add "Content-Range header MUST not appear in a PATCH 
> request".  That could even be overridden by a future spec that uses the 
> Content-Range header (and other directives, to be sure) to extend PATCH 
> to replace certain ranges of the resource being updated.
> 
> Did you have a recommendation for the Content-Range header?

No, I just want to make sure that *if* a spec makes mandatory 
requirements on the server treatment of an entire class of headers, it 
also defines how to implement them.

So what about Content-MD5? Any requirements above what RFC2616 says?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2007 18:25:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:15 GMT