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

Re: "Accept" on 415 responses?

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 18:10:33 +1300
Message-ID: <4EE6DE49.6060803@treenet.co.nz>
To: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 13/12/2011 5:26 p.m., mike amundsen wrote:
> Amos:
>
> in the example i attached:
>
> X-Accept-Types: text/html,text/xml,application/json
> is what clients can use when negotiating responses from servers
>
> X-Content-Types: text/xml,application/x-www-form-urlencoded,application/json
> is what clients can use when constructing bodies that will be sent to servers
>
> There might be better names for these two cases.

Thanks. Yes different names would be better to clarify that for the 
casual traffic observer.

Since OPTIONS is all about the server resource I guessed from the chosen 
names that Content-Types was types emitted by the server in Content-Type 
header, and "Accept-Types" being the values it understood in the Accept 
header. Which should be the same set.

Since this proposal for opening Accept to mean what your X-Content-Types 
does, are you in a position to reverse the definitions easily?
eg by changing X-Content-Types => Accept, and X-Accept-Types => 
Content-Types (with no "X-").  I might join you and make a second 
RESTful implementation along the same lines if this convention passes 
acceptance of the experts here.

AYJ
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2011 05:11:14 GMT

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