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

Just so I'm clear on this: the new response code would be used to
indicate that the response entity is equivalent to what would be
returned on a subsequent GET. If so, I'm perfectly fine with that and
have no problem adding it to the spec.

- James

Mark Baker wrote:
> On 8/1/07, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
>>> So to be clear, are you now suggesting that a 200 PATCH response would
>>> *not* have this specific meaning, and that only this new response code
>>> would indicate that it did have it?  If so, great, we're in sync.
>> Yes.
> 
> Great.
> 
> So I'm going to propose that we add this response code to the PATCH
> draft.  What does everyone think?
> 
> Mark.