- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 01:22:42 -0500
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi Karl, On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net> wrote: > 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? As an example (301, not 410); https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213467 I'm sure you could imagine how a 410 would be handled in that context. > The "410 Gone" response is cacheable. > Does that mean the server can send a body? Such as Sure. All responses can have a body, except HEAD responses. > 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? Not AFAIK. > There is something which in some cases might seems contradictory: > cacheable AND links removed. It is subtle, but an example might help understand. Can you explain why you believe it contradictory? Mark.
Received on Thursday, 25 February 2010 06:23:15 UTC