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

RE: Partially fulfilled / draft-nottingham-http-new-status

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 10:29:39 +0800
To: "'Sam Johnston'" <samj@samj.net>, "'Alex Rousskov'" <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
Cc: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <006601ccb488$1ea9faf0$5bfdf0d0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote:

> A third way would be to return a 200 OK response with an extension
> response header or custom body that indicates which parts of the request
> were not "fully fulfilled".
>
> A forth way would be to include extension request headers or custom body
> pieces indicating client preferences with regard to considering
> partially fulfilled requests successful.

What do you mean by extension response/request headers? Are you talking
about RFC 2774 [1] or just some proprietary (X-)headers?


[1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2774.txt


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2011 02:30:33 GMT

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