Re: 209 No Content vs. application/empty

On mån, 2007-10-01 at 16:18 -0700, James M Snell wrote:
> Sorry, yes, I managed to confuse myself. My only excuse is
> insanity :-)
> ... I any case, the question is more regarding the use of the Prefer
> header to request no-content and not the 209 response.

Hmm.. from the discussions I got the impression that the default should
be 204 No Content / 200 Status message (as is for PUT today), with the
client being able to indicate a preference of actually having the
modified resource entity returned as a 209..

I think some context of the discussion has gone missing here.. what use
case are we talking about?


Received on Monday, 1 October 2007 23:24:32 UTC