- 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