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

Re: #238, was: User interface requirements for redirecting to unsafe methods

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 09:17:18 +0200
Message-ID: <5086447E.7050707@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2012-10-23 09:12, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> On 23/10/2012, at 6:00 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> the text you complained about back then has been rewritten a few months ago. Please check the WGLC draft.
>>
>> With respect to tracking: I think this is issue <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/238>, see also <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2012JanMar/0928.html>.
>
>
> Yes.
>
> I do see, however, that we have this language at the top of <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-21#section-7.4>:
>
>> If the required action involves a subsequent HTTP request, it MAY be carried
>>     out by the user agent without interaction with the user if and only
>>     if the method used in the second request is known to be "safe", as
>>     defined in Section 5.2.1.
>
> MAY... if and only if is a badly constructed requirement, and it also goes against the resolution of #238. I'll enter a WGLC issue to correct that.

Indeed; when we resolved #238 we didn't fix all places where this was 
mentioned.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 07:17:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 October 2012 07:17:48 GMT