- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:01:47 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote: > > Now i70; > http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/issues/#i70 For the record: I think that the text proposed by Roy is a big improvement, and that we should adopt it as-is. For now, I have integrated it into <http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-latest.html#status.303> Also note that I added the following sentence to the Changes section (<http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-latest.html#rfc.section.F.4>): "Clarify that 303 responses can be cacheable. (Section 10.3.4)" Best regards, Julian
Received on Saturday, 21 July 2007 16:02:06 UTC