- From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@netimages.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 07:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Cc: Josh Cohen <josh@netscape.com>, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> The answer to your problem is the same I gave last time this question was > >> discussed: if you don't want ambiguous results, don't use ambiguous URLs. > >> > >What if we create another reponse code, which means > >40X "Request Ambiguous" ie please be more specific.. > > What would that gain? The application can't be any less ambiguous. > The server should be capable of either > > 1) using the URL path info to disambiguate the request and > return a redirect > or > 2) return a default page that lists the virtual hosts and explains > to the user that they need to choose one. > > The first is 301; the second is 300 THe second could be *REALLY* evil on servers with hundreds of hosts, but never-the-less seems the best option (comparable to the Apache error catch for imagemap calls without coordinates). Does a generic 300 with body break on any of the deployed Host: supporting browsers (NS2.0+, MSIE3.0+, Lynx 2.6+, WebTV, AOL 3.0, or the latest Cyberdog)? -- Benjamin Franz
Received on Monday, 12 May 1997 07:09:14 UTC