Re: Issue #12 proposed resolution

On Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 10:44:30PM -0400, Mark Baker wrote:
> > Regarding redirection, we're in somewhat of an interesting situation.
> > I *think* the WG's intent is to support automagic redirection.
> > However, there is langugage to this effect in the definitions of 301,
> > 302 and 307;
> > 
> >   If the 307 status code is received in response to a request other
> >   than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect
> >   the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this
> >   might change the conditions under which the request was issued.
> >   
> > In other words, because we use POST, client applications cannot be
> > HTTP compliant and automatically redirect SOAP requests (unless you
> > take great license with 'confirmed by the user').
> 
> Henrik and I discussed this exact issue a while ago off-line.
> IIRC, he suggested that the MUST NOT was likely too strong.
> I admitted to being surprised by it too.

No matter what we decide to do about redirection, I think the HTTP
binding needs to say something about the use of 3xx redirection;
while we can re-interpret 2616 to suit ourselves, implementors need
some guidance.

Cheers,



-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/