- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 08:40:09 PDT
- To: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>, http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> > > The HTTP syntax should be > > > > > > Location = "Location" ":" absoluteURI [ "#" fragment ] > > > > I suppose this belongs in the errata, although we might need to explain > > the circumstances under which a fragment identifier is appropriate. > > I'll update the errata page. > > When would it not be appropriate? I can't think of a case... but then it's > Monday morning. Well, let's see. - I don't think it's appropriate to have a fragment with a 201 Created response, e.g., to a POST. - I don't know what it would mean to return a fragment with a 300 Multiple Choices, since the choice decision is intended to be made on resource characteristics and not fragment characteristics (?). - I think we're mainly concerned with 301/302/303/307, but I don't think it makes sense to POST to a URI with a fragment. - I don't think it's appropriate to return a fragment with 305 Use Proxy. In addition, we should specify the behavior in the case where there was a fragment with the original URI, e.g., http://host1.com/resource1#fragment1 where /resource1 redirects to http://host2.com/resource2#fragment2 is 'fragment1' discarded? Do you find fragment2 and then find fragment1 within it? We don't have fragment combination rules. Larry
Received on Monday, 9 August 1999 09:15:28 UTC