- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 18:51:37 +0200
- To: Robert Brewer <fumanchu@aminus.org>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Robert Brewer wrote: > Yes, although I don't think that quite "removes the SHOULD for the case > where there's only one entity". Also, must we continue the tradition of It doesn't? > adding adverbs ad infinitum to create long, passive, run-on sentences? > ;) > > The "Content-Location" entity-header field supplies a URI for the > entity in the message when it is different than the requested > resource's URI. When a resource has multiple entities accessible > at separate locations, a server SHOULD provide a Content-Location > for the variant. Yes, that's better. How about changing the end to ...SHOULD provide a Content-Location for the returned entity. ? BR, Julian
Received on Sunday, 27 September 2009 16:52:21 UTC