Wilfredo Sánchez Vega wrote: >>> However, it goes on to say that if, without the If-Match header, >>> the request would have resulted in a 200-series response, that the >>> header must be ignored. >> >> >> ..other than a 2xx or a 412 (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/ >> rfc2616.html#rfc.section.14.24.p.6>): >> >> "If the request would, without the If-Match header field, result in >> anything other than a 2xx or 412 status, then the If-Match header >> MUST be ignored." >> >> So this has indeed been fixed. > > > No, my concern isn't about 412. My concern is about any other I see. I thought that including the 412 into the sentence would resolve the issue, but it doesn't :-) > possible error, such as permission errors, or other errors specific to > the operation being requested. In the case of PUT, if the PUT would > fail due to a filesystem error which would result in an error response > (for example, disk is full and a 507 is appropriate), the spec as > written requires that I ignore the If-Match header. Yes. > The problem is that in some cases, the only way to know what the > error condition would be is to actually try the operation. Doing so > could be expensive, and could require restoring everything back to its > original state when you find out that there is, in fact, no error, > which is presumably the most common case. I absolutely agree, and I don't think anybody actually implements this per spec. You probably should report this to the HTTP WG (<ietf-http-wg@w3.org>). Best regards, JulianReceived on Tuesday, 23 August 2005 17:10:56 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 12 October 2007 17:53:23 GMT