- From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 11:57:22 +0900
- To: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
- Cc: public-qa-dev@w3.org
Ville, On Feb 1, 2008, at 08:51 , Ville Skyttä wrote: > In principle, I'm inclined to disagree that 404 would be the > expected status > code for DNS failures. If a host cannot be resolved, no HTTP > transaction can > actually occur, so there actually can't be any real response code > either, > right? I'm not sure what that'd mean from the test suite POV yet nor > whether -2 makes any sense at all, but I thought I'd mention it. You're absolutely right. I'll be using the specific statuses for DNS errors, timeout and robot exclusion which checklink is using. Any other non-HTTP code you recall we're using? -- olivier
Received on Friday, 1 February 2008 02:57:29 UTC