Re: Issue: Requiring server to use / terminated URL for returned collections

Am Dienstag den, 17. September 2002, um 17:49, schrieb Clemm, Geoff:
> Good question, Julian.
>
> I was going to respond "so that client side relative URL
> processing is correct".  But of course, a better
> way to handle that would be for the GET to just return the
> slash-terminated name (or even better, the resource that it
> is really redirecting the request to, such as "index.html")
> in the Content-Location field, since the client is required
> to use the value in the Content-Location field as the base
> for relative URL processing.

I agree with you that RFC 2616 clearly states this purpose of
Content-Location.

However, neither IE 5.0, nor IE 6.0, nor Mozilla 1.1 gives
my beautiful Content-Location header any justice: it is
completely ignored when resolving relative uri references
inside the HTML page.

So, for all practical purposes, a 302 is required.

//Stefan


> So a 302 redirect is not even required for GET processing
> (i.e. the server can just automatically forward the request
> without an extra roundtrip for the 302 redirect).
>
> Cheers,
> Geoff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:24 AM
> To: Clemm, Geoff; 'Webdav WG'
> Subject: RE: Issue: Requiring server to use / terminated URL for
> returned collections
>
>
>
> Like Geoff said,
>
> except:
>
>> As indicated above, the 302 redirect is only required for a GET, and
>> WebDAV clients commonly use PROPFIND and not GET to retrieve the state
>> of a collection.
>
> Where does this distinction come from?
>
> I really don't want to get into a situation where 1) HEAD and 2)
> PROPFIND/depth 0 say different things about the same resource.
>
> Julian
>
> --
> <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 18 September 2002 09:33:30 UTC