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

Re: Indicating a resource does not exist

From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:33:39 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTikb6ypYn7sNQzB6c-=YOhaREEB1_GXqyimTAwMT@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com>
Cc: nathan@webr3.org, Joe Gregorio <joe@bitworking.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Which is surely all that the server can say?  The resource might exist in
the future. It may have existed in the past, but when in the past? Certainly
not before 1994...

A server that supported Memento [1] might be able to say that it *didn't*
exist at a particular time, but that's not the same as "doesn't,didn't and
never will exist".

Given the lack of the time dimension in HTTP without Memento, 404 seems the
correct status code.

Rob Sanderson
Los Alamos National Laboratory

1: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandesompel-memento/


On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:
> > Joe Gregorio wrote:
> >> What's wrong with 404 Not Found?
>
> > The best you can conclude from that is "don't know" the state of the
> > resource, or if there is one.
>
> It's not clear why you think that's all you can conclude.  I would
> have concluded that the origin server couldn't find a resource by that
> identifier at the time of the request. Maybe I'm not understanding the
> nuance of "doesn't exist" vs. "not found".  404 is saying it doesn't
> exist *at the time of this request*, right?
>
> --tim
>
>
Received on Thursday, 20 January 2011 15:46:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:36 GMT