- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:54:44 +1100
- To: John Kemp <john@jkemp.net>
- Cc: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>, Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>, 'Julian Reschke' <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, 'Stefan Eissing' <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>, 'HTTP Working Group' <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I think some change is needed, because the text currently places unclear conformance requirements on servers and clients. Revised proposal; In p2 10.1, change '''This field cannot prevent a client from trying other methods. However, the indications given by the Allow header field value SHOULD be followed. The actual set of allowed methods is defined by the origin server at the time of each request.''' to '''The advertised set of allowed methods may not necessarily include all (or any) methods that the server would actually allow in a presented request.''' (keeping in mind that the start of the Allow's header definition is: '''The Allow entity-header field lists the set of methods supported by the resource identified by the Request-URI. The purpose of this field is strictly to inform the recipient of valid methods associated with the resource.''' ) On 19/03/2008, at 9:30 AM, John Kemp wrote: > > Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > > [...] > >> I don't strongly object the suggested changes, but I simply don't see >> why they are needed. > > +1. I don't see how they actually make the situation any clearer > than it is today, and so I wonder why they are needed. > > - johnk > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2008 00:55:35 UTC