W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > May 2001

Re: [i95, i22] - Proposal for clarifying use of SOAPAction

From: Daniel Barclay <Daniel.Barclay@digitalfocus.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 18:08:15 -0400
Message-ID: <3AF0854F.F8A3F123@digitalfocus.com>
To: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
CC: "'Henrik Frystyk Nielsen'" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
"Williams, Stuart" wrote:
> ...
> I took a look in http://www.normos.org/ietf/rfc/rfc2817.txt which contains
> the following:
> 
> <quote>
> 7.1 HTTP Status Code Registry
> ...
>    Values to be added to this name space SHOULD be subject to review in
>    the form of a standards track document within the IETF Applications
>    Area.  Any such document SHOULD be traceable through statuses of
>    either 'Obsoletes' or 'Updates' to the Draft Standard for
>    HTTP/1.1 [1].
> </quote>
> 
> It suggests that the IETF/IANA are managing an HTTP Status Code Registry,
> but I've been unable to find a snapshot. Do you now know where the registry
> is kept?

I think the registry is the set of RFCs that are "traceable ... to ... 
HTTP1/1."  (That is, there might not be any compact, compiled summary of
all the codes.)

(Note:  RFCs at Sunsite.dk have helpful forward links to later RFCs that update 
or supersede them.  For example, see http://sunsite.dk/RFC/rfc/rfc2616.html 
and how it is annotated with "updated by 2817.")


> Also, would we qualify as a "standards track document within the IETF
> Applications Area."?

No, we're not a document.  :-)



Daniel
-- 
Daniel Barclay
Digital Focus
Daniel.Barclay@digitalfocus.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2001 18:07:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:01 GMT