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

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-reschke-http-get-location-00.txt

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:49:02 +0200
Message-ID: <46B75F0E.8070402@gmx.de>
To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> On ons, 2007-08-01 at 10:20 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>>> ...
>>> It's a bit special indeed as it doesn't act on the requested resource
>>> itself.. For PROPFIND the requested variant is clearly the PROPFIND
>>> results which is different from the request-URI resource..
>>> ...
>> My understanding was that the requested variant is independent of the 
>> request method.
> Right.. it is. Or at least thats the most intelligble definition of it.
> Doesn't make much sense in PROPFIND, but then a whole lot doesn't..


> So a new header is required for PROPFIND to be able to return the ETag
> of the PROPFIND entity. I'd propose Content-ETag for this purpose.

If we could use Content-Location for the location (which I don't think), 
I'd be +1 on that.

> I dislike trying to add new "URI" header formats with their own parsing
> requirements, which is my main objection to your new proposed header.

Understood. Note that the header format is borrowed from the "Link" 
header, though.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 6 August 2007 17:49:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:43 UTC