W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: Issue 80, was: NEW ISSUE: Content-Location vs PUT/POST

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 05:10:17 +0200
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1217473817.28440.84.camel@henriknordstrom.net>

On tis, 2008-07-29 at 16:20 -0400, Mark Baker wrote:

> In that case, I'm for Julian's proposal to simply remove "PUT or POST"
> in the last paragraph.

+1 on the first of those, where the server is still given persmission to
ignore Content-Location in requests, but not on the second where this
was removed.

In the definition of PUT there is the following restriction which
otherwise relates to Content-Location:

  "The recipient of the entity MUST NOT ignore any Content-* (e.g.
   Content-Range) headers that it does not understand or implement
   and MUST return a 501 (Not Implemented) response in such cases."

Received on Thursday, 31 July 2008 03:11:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:13:37 UTC