- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:17:14 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2011-08-31 08:15, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > On 31/08/2011, at 4:12 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > >> "The action required MAY be carried out by the user agent without interaction with the user if and only if the method used in the second request is known to be "safe", as defined in Section 6.1.1." ... > > Right. The problem is that when you combine that requirement with the proposed text, it doesn't make a lot of sense, because there is no "second request' for a 304 response... Indeed, but that's a problem with the old text as well. Let's do a minimal fix, so that we can treat issue #238 as separate problem...: "If the required action involves a subsequent HTTP request, it MAY be carried out by the user agent without interaction with the user if and only if the method used in the second request is known to be "safe", as defined in Section 6.1.1." Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2011 08:17:43 UTC