- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:34:52 +1300
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 20/11/2015 7:02 a.m., Martin Thomson wrote: > On 19 November 2015 at 09:00, Cyrus Daboo wrote: >> It seems a little odd for "success" to be indicated by a 4xx code. Why not >> just return a 204 (No Content) for that case? > > I like this. 204 indicates that the content was removed > (successfully). A 404/410 indicates that the resource was discarded. > > Obviously, the 204 state might be immediately followed by the removal > of the resource, but we don't need to separately report that. > I agree. In a system where the resource is _moved_ from the delivery URL to elsewhere 204 makes a lot of sense. It is also critical that the system tracks what it has previously processed in order to send that 204 instead of a 404 long after the object has been moved away. Amos
Received on Friday, 20 November 2015 04:36:13 UTC