- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 16:41:02 +0100
- To: Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu>
- Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
If the response has changed based upon the Prefer header, you really need to include Vary: prefer. If you can infer from that what the server did, there's no need for a separate header. Cheers, On 03/10/2012, at 4:14 PM, Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote: > Hi James, > > That would obviously work. Is reusing the Vary header not a good idea? > > > James M Snell wrote: >> A much older version of the specification included an optional Preference-Applied response header that could explicitly indicate whether a particular preference was applied, but after lots of feedback that "I wasn't going to need it", I pulled it back out (largely against my better judgement). I'm thinking that perhaps it needs to be added back in. - James >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu <mailto:murch@andrew.cmu.edu>> wrote: >> Hello, >> I'm working on draft draft-murchison-webdav-prefer which describes >> how the return-minimal and return-representation apply to >> WebDAV/CalDAV methods. My work is primarily CalDAV-centric but we >> are trying to make it generic to WebDAV and its derivatives. >> One of the issues that keeps coming up is a way for the client to >> differentiate between two cases: >> - the server doesn't return a representation because it ignored or >> doesn't support the return-representation preference >> - the server understood the preference but didn't return a >> representation because it didn't change from what was in the request >> One possible solution is for the server to return a Vary: Prefer >> header to indicate that the server understood the preference, >> thereby allowing the client to infer what the lack of a >> representation in the response means. >> The next question is, does any such mandate or recommendation, if >> required, belong in my webdav-prefer draft or in the base Prefer spec? >> Thoughts? >> -- Kenneth Murchison >> Principal Systems Software Engineer >> Carnegie Mellon University > > > -- > Kenneth Murchison > Principal Systems Software Engineer > Carnegie Mellon University > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 15:41:34 UTC