- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 10:32:40 -0800
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 16 December 2014 at 09:56, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Anyway, I'd like to avoid anything that might get people to think that > "OPTIONS *" is anything but a bad design mistake. In particular I don't want > any new specs to rely on it, when it's known to be hard to implement (as the > asterisk form doesn't map to a proper URI). I agree. That's why I didn't mention the asterisk form at all. And you are right that HEAD / is not going to reveal anything of note. I can say HEAD or OPTIONS, any safe method. Maybe the best way to express a preference here is to generate a pull request :)
Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2014 18:33:13 UTC