W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: Proposal: i105 Classification for Allow header

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:48:22 +0100
Message-ID: <47D64756.5090200@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

OK,

done with <http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/232>.

Note that this mainly affects P2, where I added the statement below to 
the Changes appendix:

"Reclassify Allow header as response header, removing the option to 
specify it in a PUT request. (Section 10.1)"

Also note that with this change, we got rid of another ABNF dependency 
from P3 to P2.

BR, Julian


Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
> I'm going to call this closed for now; if new information turns up, we 
> can reopen it.
> 
> 
> On 03/03/2008, at 7:20 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> 
>>
>> Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> <http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/105>
>>> Proposal:
>>> Change the classification of Allow to a response header, removing the 
>>> following text;
>>>  The Allow header field MAY be provided with a PUT request to 
>>> recommend the methods to be supported by the new or modified 
>>> resource. The server is not required to support these methods and 
>>> SHOULD include an Allow header in the response giving the actual 
>>> supported methods.
>>> (or moving to an appendix and marking as deprecated behaviour)
>>
>> +1, unless examples of it being used turn up.
>>
>> If we remove it, I think mentioning it in the Changes section would be 
>> sufficient.
>>
>> BR, Julian
>>
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2008 08:48:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:37 GMT