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

Re: Prefer Draft Feedback

From: Moore, Jonathan (CIM) <Jonathan_Moore@Comcast.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:38:17 +0000
To: James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CB03AE1C.23427%Jonathan_Moore@Comcast.com>
On 12/5/11 7:32 PM, "James Snell" <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-http-prefer-05
Hi James,

I had a question about the following recommendation:

> When honoring the "return-status" preference, the server SHOULD NOT
> include a Content-Location header field in the response.


What if the status has its own URI, to be used for polling the status of a
long-running job, for example? Wouldn't it be appropriate to provide this
URI in a Content-Location header on the response?

Jon 

........
Jon Moore
Comcast Interactive Media
Received on Tuesday, 6 December 2011 16:38:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:50 GMT