W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: [Bug 12] Destination header "consistent"

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 10:32:55 +0200
Message-ID: <436333B7.8000602@gmx.de>
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
CC: Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>, WebDav WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>

Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> 
> 
> On Oct 28, 2005, at 3:13 PM, Jim Whitehead wrote:
> 
>>> What if I remove the header from the response example, in addition to 
>>> Jim's suggested change?
>>>
>>
>> Urk, bad idea.
>>
>> The use of Location with MOVE is to be consistent with the semantics 
>> of the 201 response code.
>>
> Tacking on to my previous comment where I said I didn't think Location 
> was REQUIRED with 201...  note that in RFC2518, we had an example of 
> MKCOL, where the response was 201 Created without a Location header:
> 
> 8.3.3 Example - MKCOL
> 
>     This example creates a collection called /webdisc/xfiles/ on the 
> server www.server.org.
> 
>     >>Request
> 
>     MKCOL /webdisc/xfiles/ HTTP/1.1
>     Host: www.server.org
> 
>     >>Response
> 
>     HTTP/1.1 201 Created
> 

Lisa,

would you *please* read the sections from RFC2616 that define this?

Again, from 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#rfc.section.14.30>:

"The Location response-header field is used to redirect the recipient to 
a location other than the Request-URI for completion of the request or 
identification of a new resource."

The location isn't different, so no new URI is needed.


Best regards, Julian
Received on Saturday, 29 October 2005 08:33:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:11 GMT