Re: http progress notification

On 26.05.2010 00:37, Elias Sinderson wrote:
> Adrien de Croy wrote:
>> On 26/05/2010 4:12 a.m., Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> You really really should choose a free status code; 102 has been
>>> defined in RFC 2518.
>> [...] it was discussed that the existing webdav 102 status could be an
>> appropriate code - in other words that the Progress response header
>> could be an application for it.
> '102 Processing' seems like a very good fit to me (but not 102 OK /
> Progress / Info), provided that you extend the existing definition in a
> compatible way.

That's the important part: if you can make it an extension, go ahead 
(but take over the definition in the IANA registry), otherwise pick a 
new one.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Wednesday, 26 May 2010 06:59:47 UTC