W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: Clarification on HTTP redirects 301,302, and 307

From: Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 12:43:06 -0800
Cc: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <98BC1EFF-C564-4AA4-8882-F95E2A94ABC2@oracle.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
What is the objection to 308?  

If there is good reason not to use it, why not pick another code?

Phil

@independentid
www.independentid.com
phil.hunt@oracle.com

On 2014-01-16, at 12:23 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:

> On 2014-01-16 21:11, Phil Hunt wrote:
>> Both 301 and 302 say to use 307 if conversion to GET is not desired.
>> 
>> With 307 used for both temporary and perm redirect, 307 loses meaning causing the confusion.
>> 
>> Phil
>> ...
> 
> Do you have a concrete change proposal that doesn't require putting 308 into the base spec?
> 
> Best regards, Julian
> 
Received on Thursday, 16 January 2014 20:43:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:23 UTC