- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 08:56:53 +0000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <818CC92A-A4B9-496A-8ACE-23F0DFC5BDDD@mnot.net>, Mark Nottingham wri tes: >>> Before we get to that, though =E2=80=94 is there a compelling reason not >>> to use the Link header for this? >> >> The Link header could theoretically be used to point to non-blocked versions >> of the content, but I don't think that schenario is likely. > >That's not what I meant. I know. You asked for compelling reasons *not* to use Link and I gave you the most (but not very) compelling reason not to do so. :-) I fully agree, we should just use Link for the 451 reason/authority URI -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 31 August 2015 09:08:25 UTC