- From: Terry Crowley <tcrowley@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:22:07 -0800
- To: "'Greg Stein'" <gstein@lyra.org>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
I'd have to agree on the point that a 507 response isn't particularly useful. Just what is a client supposed to do with that? How are they supposed to recover? What kind of feedback do they provide to the user that they just got back a partial result set (and as Greg points out, it would be very difficult to know how it was truncated). Many clients would want to just treat that as a complete failure and try a different approach, but in the meantime they might have had to download and parse a very large (but not large enough) response that they end up discarding. Terry Crowley >> Returning 507 would be a bit more difficult implementation-wise. However, I >> think we really shouldn't allow that mechanism. What is a client to do when >> it gets a 507? How does it know *what* was left out, and *how* to get those >> results? Did the server do a depth-first or a breadth-first response of >> properties? Which collections did it recurse into and which did it not? Did >> it stop *partway* through a collection? How can a client tell? >> -- >> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Sunday, 26 November 2000 22:22:53 UTC