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

Re: 1xx response semantics

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 11:52:52 +1000
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <42671BEA-86F1-46E4-B86C-08F86F72C625@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On 06/07/2011, at 6:30 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:


> That is true, and we could state that.
> So Mark -- what made you start this thread? What's the problem you think we need to fix?

I was hoping that we could simplify things for implementers, future API designers, extension authors, etc.

It's pretty clear that this isn't so simple. I'm concerned that any advice we could give would be so vague as to be useless. 

Part of me wonders whether it would be useful to say something specific about 100 Continue responses and the relationship of their headers to the final response's, but that also feels like a rathole.

If someone has a suggestion for specific text that concretely improves things, great, but otherwise, we should probably move on to more productive discussions.


Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 7 July 2011 01:53:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:58 UTC