Re: 202 Accepted, Location, and Retry-After

On 2011-10-24 18:13, James Snell wrote:
> Julian, thank you for the pointer, I had missed that thread entirely.
> The distinction between the final response and the status monitor
> concern could be addressed through the additional application of the
> Content-Location header. Within a 202 Response, the Location URI would
> be assumed to point essentially to a status monitor, while the
> Content-Location would point to the URI of the final response. If they
 > ...

In which case we'd need to special-case status code 202 within 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-latest.html#identifying.response.associated.with.representation>, 
right?

> ...

Best regards, Julian