- From: Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:49:19 -0400
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
I think for OPTIONS the client can omit all but the :method pseudo header. In any case, I'm +1 on clarifying this in the spec, particularly for "OPTIONS *". On Jul 24, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > On 24 July 2014 08:14, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote: >> IMHO it be more correct to say simply that :path may be omitted on >> OPTIONS and represents a request for "*" asterisk-form? as opposed to a >> 0-length :path field which represents the path-empty case. > > That would permit a more correct reconstruction of the original 1.1 request. > > I think that I need a second opinion before making such a change. What > do others think? > _________________________________________________________ Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
Received on Thursday, 24 July 2014 15:49:54 UTC