W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Issue 80, was: NEW ISSUE: Content-Location vs PUT/POST

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 08:49:34 +0200
Message-ID: <4A0132FE.6000105@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>, 'Henrik Nordstrom' <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>, 'Mark Baker' <distobj@acm.org>, 'HTTP Working Group' <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote:
> So, to summarise, it seems like we have agreement here that removing  
> "PUT and POST" from the sentence, making it:
> 
> "The meaning of the Content-Location header in requests is undefined; 
> servers are free to ignore it in those cases."
> 
> It seems like there may be a bit of alignment needed, depending on how 
> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/79> goes...

Agreed.

Proposed patch in 
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/80/80.diff>.

BR, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 06:50:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:02 GMT