- From: Gavin Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 10:47:37 -0400
- To: john@math.nwu.edu
- Cc: luotonen@netscape.com, www-talk@w3.org, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
>is required also to be honored. It is quite acceptable to return an >"access denied" status for the second URL. Parameters like byterange >while very useful in some applications are useless, meaningless, hard >to serve, or even impossible to serve in other cases. We can all come >up with our favorite example. When a byterange is requested in such >an instance the server should simply refuse the request with an >appropriate status code. If a server does not support byteranges >(e.g. most current servers) and receives a request for one it will >presumably send a "file does not exist" status code. This is fine. I would much prefer to have a method, whereby I can send a "Method not allowed" or "Not implemented" error. Also, by having a method rather than a URL extension, we don't pollute URL namespace with kibble from supporting "some" applications.
Received on Thursday, 18 May 1995 10:06:23 UTC