W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: http progress notification

From: Henrik Nordström <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 19:56:47 +0200
To: Elias Sinderson <elias@cse.ucsc.edu>
Cc: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1274896607.7394.8.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
tis 2010-05-25 klockan 15:37 -0700 skrev Elias Sinderson:

> '102 Processing' seems like a very good fit to me (but not 102 OK / 
> Progress / Info), provided that you extend the existing definition in a 
> compatible way.

Does it?

The concept of the two is similar, but:

The definition of 102 have another header attached which this proposal
do not use at all.

the definition of 102 Processing is based on being authorative by the
origin server with wordings such as " has accepted the complete request,
but has not yet completed it". Both clauses there may be invalid in this
proposal as the progress indication is not necessarily related at all to
the server as such, in fact most times not at all..

Received on Wednesday, 26 May 2010 17:57:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:53 UTC