- 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