RE: IE5 bug, was... RE: MKCOL with entity request body

> > The entire intent of this requirement was extensibility.  We wanted to
> > ensure that implementors wouldn't add code that rejected a MKCOL
immediately
> > if it had a request body, since this would make future extension of
MKCOL
> > impossible.
>
> In that case IE5 needs to fix this. :-)  IE5 closes the
> connection before even
> reading the body.  It apparently is not prepared to accept a multi-status
> response.

I had been thinking this was a server-side extensibility issue.  I don't
think it's unreasonable for a client which submits a MKCOL without a request
body to not accept a 207 response, when the spec. states that a 201
(Created) is returned.

So, if a client submits a MKCOL without request body, it really only needs
to expect a 201 (Created) as a response code (although it should do the
right thing and treat all other 2xx responses as a 200, and a good
implementation would also read the body of a 207).

If a client submits a MKCOL with request body, it should expect either a 201
or a 207 -- both are legitimate responses.

- Jim