- From: Svensson, Lars <l.svensson@d-nb.de>
- Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 16:02:47 +0200
- To: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: "Henrik Nordstrom" <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
In litteris suis de Mittwoch, 2. September 2009 11:02, Henrik Nordstrom <mailto:henrik@henriknordstrom.net>scripsit: > ons 2009-09-02 klockan 08:53 +0200 skrev Svensson, Lars: >> At my place we're a bit unsure of the use of Status Code 500. One of >> our apps (a distributed one) returns a SC 500 when there is a >> communication errror with one of the subsystems. > > Sounds reasonable to me. 500 is "unspecified server failure". Thanks for your reply. It turned out to be a bit different than I first said: It's not a communication error that causes the malfunction, but a bug in the application that causes an exception to be thrown when data from the subsystem is processed. Would you still agree that SC 500 is reasonable, or (since we know about the exception and can catch it) that an error page serving SC 200 and the error message would be more appropriate? > 500 is "unspecified server failure". If 500 is "unspecified", is there any way I can specify the error? I haven't really found anything in the spec... Finally: Do you (or anyone else on this list) know if there are any best practices for those cases and -- if so -- where those are documented? Thanks in advance, Lars -- Dr. Lars G. Svensson Deutsche Nationalbibliothek Informationstechnik Adickesallee 1 60322 Frankfurt http://www.d-nb.de/
Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 14:03:32 UTC