- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 13:31:08 -0700
- To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 3 July 2013 12:16, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote: > For each status code in the 300 range please clarify which HTTP methods are > acceptable (e.g. is 304 acceptable for methods other than GET?) and whether > the server MUST or MUST NOT process the request before responding with that > code. We just discussed a more general version of the same issue for HTTP/2.0. Whether the request has been processed or not is implicit in the description of some of the codes. For instance: 303 says: The response to the request can be found under a different URI and SHOULD be retrieved using a GET method on that resource. That says to me that the response can be retrieved. If the request implies some action, and the only way to observe whether that action has occurred is to GET the identified resource, then the exact time that said action occurs need only be between receipt of the first (the POST) request and the response to the redirected GET. That allows some freedom to servers that I'd be opposed to giving up. If the results of the action can be observed in other ways, then those ways need to be consistent with what the server has reported. That is entirely up to the server, though. If there is a specific case where you believe this to be necessary, because it creates an ambiguity, then by all means let us know. My read of the 3xx series says that only 303 has this potential for interesting behavior.
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 20:31:35 UTC