W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: ISSUE-13: suggest closing

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:49:32 +0200
Message-ID: <4A8D546C.3000804@gmx.de>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/13
>>> This was a feature proposal that was never adequately developed into 
>>> a complete concrete proposal. I suggest that it is too late to 
>>> consider proposals for new features at this time. I suggest closing 
>>> this issue.
>>> Regards,
>>> Maciej
>> Yes and no. I believe the spec now says a few more things about 401 
>> then it used to, so I'd like to review and enter a comment so that 
>> information isn't lost. I do agree that it's too late to introduce 
>> anything more complicated right now.
> Would you be willing to decouple your review from the issue? I'm sure if 
> you find new concrete problems with the spec text they will be given due 
> consideration. I'd rather not have this issue sit open forever in the 
> meantime.
> ...

The spec currently says:

"HTTP 401 responses that do not include a challenge recognized by the 
user agent must be processed as if they had no challenge, e.g. rendering 
the entity body as if the response had been 200 OK.

User agents may show the entity body of an HTTP 401 response even when 
the response do include a recognized challenge, with the option to login 
being included in a non-modal fashion, to enable the information 
provided by the server to be used by the user before authenticating. 
Similarly, user agents should allow the user to authenticate (in a 
non-modal fashion) against authentication challenges included in other 
responses such as HTTP 200 OK responses, effectively allowing resources 
to present HTTP login forms without requiring their use." -- 

That doesn't solve the full problem, but at least it clarifies what User 
Agents are supposed to do, and will allow future innovation.

So I'm personally ok with closing the issue.

BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 20 August 2009 13:50:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:50 UTC