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

Re: Issue 160 (Redirects and non-GET methods)

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:28:15 +0200
To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.vjsktdx164w2qv@anne-van-kesterens-macbook-pro.local>
On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:16:57 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>  
wrote:
> IE breaks the spec in fewer cases than the others, and gets away with  
> it. I think that's an indication that breaking it in all cases isn't  
> needed.

Agreed, but it is way more ugly than what the other browsers do in my  
opinion and might cause people to avoid using POST (in favor of CHICKEN)  
just because of this rather than simply start using 307 which will work  
everywhere.


>>> Also, what about HEAD? Or OPTIONS?
>>
>> The same. 301/302 are effectively equivalent to 303. Seems better than
>> equivalent to 307 except for POST.
>
> Well, let's agree to disagree on that :-)


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 29 September 2010 11:28:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:25 GMT