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

Re: 1xx response semantics

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 10:26:40 +0200
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110705082640.GC14842@1wt.eu>
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 07:17:22AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20110705065339.GF12909@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes:
> >On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 06:13:03AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> 
> >After all, saying that 101 is an exception to 1xx
> >is not much different from saying that 204 is an exception to 2xx in
> >that it does not hold any body.
> 
> Explaining that it is in the wrong group would make the overall scheme
> clearer and hopefully deter similar additions in the future.

It could be an idea. Maybe we could express it slightly differently though,
in order not to confuse too much the rare people who read specs. Something
saying that 101 is always the last HTTP response.

Willy
Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 08:27:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:44 GMT