Cameron: once you complete the changes, send me a link and i'll replace that local file i am using now to your link. that way any future changes will be automatically reflected from my page. mca http://amundsen.com/blog/ http://twitter.com@mamund http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 08:53, Cameron Heavon-Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>wrote: > > On 01/12/2011, at 9:03 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > > Ah, OK, missed that. Thanks. Still would be nice to have more details. > > i performed the tests manually using a html form which captured a status > code to return and whether to include a payload or not. this was sent to a > simple web server with POST and the server setup to create a response with > the relevant status and content. the behaviour was observed and recored in > the browser and using available debug tools. > > i used http POST to try and gather the behaviour which may be seen with > the addition of new methods, testing over GET seemed a bit irrespective as > it's only the browser's handling of retrieving a URL. > > the 3xx results are the most interesting as this is the area where there > is the most room for interpretation on what an agent should do for the user. > > i'm updating it with as new status code tests and will split the table > out, let me know if i can provide any more details. > > thanks, > cam > > > > > On 02/12/2011, at 7:59 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > > > >> On 2011-12-01 21:55, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >>> Was he testing how browsers handled the indicated code in response to > a GET here? > >>> > >>> If so, what do the 3xx results he shows mean? Without the methodology, > this raises more questions than it answers. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >> > >> It's all from a HTML form POST, AFAIU. > >> > >> Best regards, Julian > > > > -- > > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > > > > >Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 13:58:28 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:26 UTC