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

Re: 209 No Content vs. application/empty

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 01:12:55 +0200
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1191280375.30916.2.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
On mån, 2007-10-01 at 08:00 -0700, James M Snell wrote:
> Mark Nottingham has suggested that rather than inventing a new Accept
> header and 209 No Content response type, it might be better to create a
> new media type that indicates the absense of content and use Accept to
> indicate the preference.

Now I am confused.. wasn't 209 supposed to return the entity as such?
There is alread "204 No Content" for empty responses if you only want to
return meta data (relevant headers)..


Received on Monday, 1 October 2007 23:13:19 UTC

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