- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:35:38 +1100
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: "Julian F. F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
My understanding is that a proposal along these lines* is acceptable, with one exception; Julian believes that if we do this, we should also relax the client-side requirement. One way to do that would be to change "SHOULD"->"should" (i.e., make it advisory text, instead of a requirement). Thoughts? * In my mind,the "the"->"a" proposal is roughly equivalent to the proposed text below. On 07/03/2008, at 2:33 PM, Robert Sayre wrote: >> Exactly. We're not here to re-design Allow or come up with a better >> mechanism; just to clarify what it means today. >> >> To reiterate, my proposal: >> >> > "The actual set of allowed methods is defined by the origin server >> > at the time of each request." >> > >> > to >> > >> > "The actual set of allowed methods is defined by the origin server >> > at the time of each request, and may not necessarily include all >> (or >> > any) methods that the server would actually allow in a request if >> > presented." >> > > Looks good to me. > > - Rob -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2008 04:36:02 UTC