- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:13:36 +1100
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/229> I've incorporated the proposal below as a starting point: --->8--- When it is necessary to express new semantics for a HTTP response that aren't specific to a single application or media type, and currently defined status codes are inadequate, a new status code can be registered [ref to 4.1]. New HTTP status codes MUST be defined in one of the categories defined in [ref to section 8]. They MUST NOT disallow a response body, although they MAY mandate a zero-length response body. They MAY require the presence of particular HTTP response header. Likewise, their definitions MAY specify that caches are allowed to use heuristics to determine their freshness [ref to p6] (by default, it is not allowed), and MAY define how to determine the resource which they carry a representation for [ref to p2 6.1] (by default, it is anonymous). If there are particular request conditions that produce a response containing the status code (e.g., request headers and/or method(s)), they SHOULD be described in detail. New HTTP status codes SHOULD be registered in a document that isn't specific to an application or other use of HTTP, so that it's clear that they are not specific to that application or extension. ---8<--- I expect we'll find more here, but wanted to get something in. Feedback appreciated, as always. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 19 October 2010 06:14:10 UTC