- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 10:50:53 -0700
- To: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, sandro@w3.org
On 2 September 2014 08:00, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org> wrote: > We could ask questions like "Is /Index?page=1 a representation of > /Index ?" and "What is the subject of the metadata in a 200+CL, the > effective request URI or the CL?" The end result of these is that we > evaluate the use cases for 303. I think that saying we end up re-evaluating the need for 303 is drawing a pretty long bow. Why don't we talk instead about semantics. What semantic distinction are you looking to make? There's a functional pattern you are looking to enable (request this, get that instead, don't pay extra round trips), but that pattern is supported by 200+CL.
Received on Thursday, 4 September 2014 17:51:21 UTC