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

Re: #300: Define non-final responses

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:52:33 +1100
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <FD3A4C7C-BA89-4D77-8B02-9CB97F0470AA@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On 25/10/2011, at 3:41 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 2011-07-18 08:05, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> I think we're hitting diminishing returns here, and possibly approaching the angels dancing on the pins.
>> 
>> If someone has a proposal for a text change that they think will represent consensus, great.
>> 
>> In the meantime, I don't see any pushback on the proposed resolution, as it affects p1.
>> ...
> 
> So what is the proposed resolution?

The original e-mail said:

> 1xx responses are non-final; i.e., the underlying model is that for each request, there are 0 to many non-final responses, and exactly one final response.
> 
> This should be made explicit at a high level; it's implied by the definition of 1xx, but never really spelled out anywhere.


... so it needs some text, probably somewhere in or around p1 2.1 "Client/Server Messaging".

Do you want to take a stab at it, or would you like a textual proposal?


--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2011 23:53:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:49 GMT