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

Location, fragments, and when not to use them

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 09:50:17 +0200
Message-ID: <4DD37A39.5040202@gmx.de>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi there,

P2 currently says 
(<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-14.html#rfc.section.9.4.p.7>):

"There are circumstances in which a fragment identifier in a Location 
URI would not be appropriate:

     - With a 201 Created response, because in this usage the Location 
header field specifies the URI for the entire created resource.
     - With 305 Use Proxy."

This is not very helpful. as we have deprecated 305 (and advice-only 
anyway).

I'd like to reduce this to:

"There are circumstances in which a fragment identifier in a Location 
URI would not be appropriate. For instance, when it appears in a 201 
Created response, where the Location header field specifies the URI for 
the entire created resource."

Feedback appreciated,

Julian
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 07:50:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:40 GMT