- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:56:29 +0100
- To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
- CC: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
Cullen Jennings wrote: > On 10/28/05 8:24 PM, "Geoffrey M Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > >>+1 for either Jim's suggested text or saying nothing, >>and +1 that we then close this issue. >> >>Cheers, >>Geoff > > > So I am a client implementer, should I do anything with the Location header > in a 207 or should I just always ignore it? <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#rfc.section.14.30>: "The Location response-header field is used to redirect the recipient to a location other than the Request-URI for completion of the request or identification of a new resource." The first part is for redirects (3xx), the second one for creation of resources (201). So right now HTTP doesn't seem to define anything for other response codes, so a recipient can ignore it. However, future revisions of RFC2616 (or other protocol extensions) may want to use it in more scenarios, so AFAIK we should *not* say anything more here. Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 30 October 2005 22:57:32 UTC