- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 07:33:47 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CABP7RbcQBsHNEBDN9X4_QjpBSCOHumUgJsfAkeiP1a=xWZecWQ@mail.gmail.com>
The last time I used 205 was in a document management app I wrote in 1999. I think deprecating it is safe. On Apr 28, 2013 10:35 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > p2 defines this status code: > > > The 205 (Reset Content) status code indicates that the server has > fulfilled the request and desires that the user agent reset the "document > view", which caused the request to be sent, to its original state as > received from the origin server. > > but AIUI it isn't implemented in any browser. See: > > http://benramsey.com/blog/2008/05/http-status-204-no-content-and-205-reset-content/ > > While it might have uses outside of browsers, the identified use case *is* > data entry, which screams "browser" (at least to me). > > AFAICT it was first proposed here: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg-old/1995MayAug/0575.html > and resolutely failed to catch on. > > This being the case, should we consider noting its lack of implementation > support, or even deprecating it (as we did for 305, which showed a similar > lack of interest/deployment)? > > Cheers, > > P.S. I don't want to spend a lot of time on this; if people have strong > feelings against both noting lack of support and deprecating it, just say > so and I'm happy to drop it. OTOH if you think it's a good idea, say so and > it'll help us make a decision more quickly. > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > > >
Received on Monday, 29 April 2013 14:34:15 UTC