- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 15:42:41 +0100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
* Julian Reschke wrote:
>When it was written, the status code description was consistent with the
>HTTPbis P2 draft that was current back then -- see
><http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-19.html#rfc.section.7.3>.
>
>Since then, the definition was rephrased quite a bit, and I believe it
>would be good to update the prose in the 308 definition accordingly in
>order to avoid confusion.
(Accordingly, some of my comments also apply to P2.)
>> 3. 308 Permanent Redirect
>>
>> The 308 (Permanent Redirect) status code indicates that the target
>> resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any future
>> references to this resource ought to use one of the enclosed URIs.
>> Clients with link editing capabilities ought to automatically re-link
>> references to the effective request URI (Section 5.5 of
>> [draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging]) to one or more of the new
>> references sent by the server, where possible.
I think the use of "enclosed" here is confusing. Status codes to not en-
close URIs. Response bodies might, but it is unclear whether clients can
use URIs from bodies as intended by the status code. There also cannot
be multiple `Location` headers or multiple URIs in one `Location` header
so it's not immediately clear why this uses the plural.
>> The server SHOULD generate a Location header field
>> ([draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics], Section 7.1.2) in the response
>> containing a preferred URI reference for the new permanent URI. The
>> user agent MAY use the Location field value for automatic
>> redirection. The server's response payload usually contains a short
>> hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s).
I think "a preferred URI reference for" is confusing and redundant and
should be removed (for instance, having multiple preferred URI refs for
an URI would be strange). I have some doubts about the "usually" above
and prefer the previous formulation ("can").
>> A 308 response is cacheable by default; i.e., unless otherwise
>> indicated by the method definition or explicit cache controls (see
>> [draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache], Section 4.2.2).
It is not clear to me that this is the same as saying caches may use
a heuristic to determine freshness (that was in the old text). "by
default; i.e.," is redundant and confusing and should be removed.
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2014 14:43:08 UTC