- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 19:29:55 -0700
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Just so I'm clear on this: the new response code would be used to indicate that the response entity is equivalent to what would be returned on a subsequent GET. If so, I'm perfectly fine with that and have no problem adding it to the spec. - James Mark Baker wrote: > On 8/1/07, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote: >>> So to be clear, are you now suggesting that a 200 PATCH response would >>> *not* have this specific meaning, and that only this new response code >>> would indicate that it did have it? If so, great, we're in sync. >> Yes. > > Great. > > So I'm going to propose that we add this response code to the PATCH > draft. What does everyone think? > > Mark.
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2007 02:30:06 UTC