W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: API Rate Limits and HTTP Code [#255]

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 08:10:06 +1000
Cc: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Bryce Nesbitt <bnesbitt@bepress.com>
Message-Id: <698C5509-062E-443B-B039-C0BE6F26FF89@mnot.net>
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
OK. I think we're getting into wordsmithing here; I'll include this as editorial input and see where they take it.

Cheers,


On 06/04/2011, at 7:35 AM, Adrien de Croy wrote:

> 
> Why not just say something like
> 
> "The server is currently unable or unwilling to handle the request."
> 
> Then give some explanatory text such as:
> 
> "The server may be prepared to handle the request if resubmitted after a delay.  This is intended to be used for conditions including:
> 
> * temporary overloading
> * server maintenance
> * client rate limiting
> * any case where service is temporarily unavailable.
> "
> 
> the point I'm trying to make is if we define too narrowly the reasons why the code should be used, it will just invite issues later on when people search for an appropriate code to use for their new application which we didn't think about. where really the code just means "not right now".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 6/04/2011 6:58 a.m., Karl Dubost wrote:
>> Le 27 mars 2011 à 10:16, Mark Nottingham a écrit :
>>> I think it's a bit too detailed. How about just changing the first sentence to:
>>> 
>>> The server is currently unable or unwilling to handle the request due to a temporary overloading, maintenance of the server, or rate limiting of the client.
>> fine for me.
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Adrien de Croy - WinGate Proxy Server - http://www.wingate.com
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2011 22:10:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:38 GMT