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

Re: [Bug 12] Destination header "consistent"

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:49:09 -0700
Message-Id: <7ee90c7bfc5d6f4415c0c5a3230a956d@osafoundation.org>
Cc: Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>, WebDav WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>


On Oct 29, 2005, at 1:32 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> 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

Julian,  I have read RFC2616.  I read the relevant section immediately 
before posting which is why I thought that Location was probably not 
required with 201 Created, for the reasons you state.  If you think 
we're saying something different, *please* explain why.

Lisa
Received on Saturday, 29 October 2005 15:49:31 GMT

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