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: Thu, 07 May 2009 10:50:50 +0200
Message-ID: <4A02A0EA.2090709@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>
Julian Reschke wrote:
> 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>.

Applied with <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/577>.

BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 7 May 2009 08:51:52 GMT

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