W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Content-Length and 304

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 10:27:31 -0700
Cc: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <349011AE-BC9A-4E81-B81E-BA22789ADA6C@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
My experience has always been that the C-L on a 304 represents the length of the response had it been whole, and I see that as just a clarification of current practice. 

However, I agree that the SHOULD is too strong here, as it makes several existing implementations non-conformant. 

Cheers,


On 20/09/2012, at 2:46 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:

> On 2012-09-20 03:22, Zhong Yu wrote:
>> In the latest bis draft, a 304 response SHOULD set Content-Length
>> equal to the length of the would-be payload body.
>> ...
> 
> That was the case since -19 (just clarifying).
> 
> I also note that the requirements in P1 (Content-Length) and P4 (status code 304) do not seem to be totally in sync.
> 
> Best regards, Julian
> 

--
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2012 17:27:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 September 2012 17:28:01 GMT