- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 01:25:40 +0000
- To: Phil Archer <phil.archer@talis.com>
- Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 09:05:09 +0000 Phil Archer <phil.archer@talis.com> wrote: > I wrote a short blog entry-like piece last night [1]. My basic point > being that I agree wholly with Ian's analysis but disagree with his > conclusions and I argue the case for a new HTTP status code. I also had that thought. Instead of: 200 OK We'd have: 250 This Might Do I created a test script to play around with this idea a few days ago, then promptly forgot all about it. http://examples.tobyinkster.co.uk/test-status-codes.cgi/250/This%20Might%20Do -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 01:26:06 UTC