W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 1996

Re: HTTP response version, again

From: Abigail <abigail@ny.fnx.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 12:05:29 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199612301705.MAA07117@melgor.ny.fnx.com>
To: Bob Jernigan <jern@spaceaix.jhuapl.edu>
Cc: abigail@ny.fnx.com, swingard@spyglass.com, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/2191
You, Bob Jernigan, wrote:
++ > In my opinion, the server should not include HTTP/1.1 headers which are
++ > not part of HTTP/1.0 when responding to a HTTP/1.0 request, and label
++ > the response as being HTTP/1.0.
++ > 
++ > Abigail
++ > 
++ It's not the response that being labeled by the HTTP/1.1 header, it's
++ the server's capability.  There would be no reason to send an HTTP
++ header if it only had to match the client's request.

It doesn't have to match. A server could respond with an HTTP header
*less* than the request.

Received on Monday, 30 December 1996 09:10:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:00 UTC