Additional HTTP Status Codes - draft-nottingham-http-new-status-02


I read this draft this morning and I have a couple of questions.

1.  Section 6:  Why is this a 5xx status code and not a 4xx status
code?  It seems to me like a client problem (failure to present
appropriate credentials) and thus more appropriate as a 4xx status
2.  Section 3:  How does this relate to 409 and 412?
3.  Sections 3,4,5,6.1:  The HTML examples in these sections seem like
they should be left out in keeping with RFC2616 which, IMO more
appropriately, specifies only the status code and other optional and
required data items - not what the return page might look like.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.


Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2011 18:06:01 UTC