- From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:53:17 -0800
- To: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Received on Monday, 31 October 2005 18:53:27 UTC
Thanks - Well if that's the case, seem like an argument that everything that needs saying has already been said. On 10/31/05 4:16 AM, "Geoffrey M Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > You would do the same as what you would always do with a Location > header in a response, i.e., use the URL specified in the Location header > the next time you wanted to apply a method to the resource. > > Cheers, > Geoff > > Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> wrote on 10/30/2005 02:53:15 PM: > >> > 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? >> > >
Received on Monday, 31 October 2005 18:53:27 UTC