- From: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
- Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:35:25 -0500
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi, I was reading again the draft and I had a few questions about 410 Gone The draft specification says: In HTTP/1.1, part 2: Message Semantics At http://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/httpbis/draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p2-semantics.html#status.410 8.4.11 410 Gone The requested resource is no longer available at the server and no forwarding address is known. This condition is expected to be considered permanent. Clients with link editing capabilities SHOULD delete references to the request-target after user approval. If the server does not know, or has no facility to determine, whether or not the condition is permanent, the status code 404 (Not Found) SHOULD be used instead. This response is cacheable unless indicated otherwise. The 410 response is primarily intended to assist the task of web maintenance by notifying the recipient that the resource is intentionally unavailable and that the server owners desire that remote links to that resource be removed. Such an event is common for limited-time, promotional services and for resources belonging to individuals no longer working at the server's site. It is not necessary to mark all permanently unavailable resources as "gone" or to keep the mark for any length of time -- that is left to the discretion of the server owner. This seems to be undefined: "Clients with link editing capabilities" but used in two places "8.3.2 301 Moved Permanently" and "8.4.11 410 Gone". > Clients with link editing capabilities > SHOULD delete references to the request-target > after user approval. What is the scenario for this feature? The "410 Gone" response is cacheable. Does that mean the server can send a body? Such as HTTP/1.1 410 Gone Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 03:28:01 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.0 Content-Length: 204 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 410 Gone There used to be something here about poneys and rainbows but a cloud has stolen it It says also that links could be removed from the original source. Do we have an example of such a working system without human help? There is something which in some cases might seems contradictory: cacheable AND links removed. It is subtle, but an example might help understand. -- Karl Dubost Montréal, QC, Canada http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Received on Thursday, 25 February 2010 04:07:31 UTC