- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:17:08 -0400
- To: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>
- Cc: "Ed Davies" <edavies@nildram.co.uk>, "Technical Architecture Group WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
David Booth writes: > I think it is true for a 303, because by redirecing you > somewhere else, the 303 is acknowledging that there is a > resource associated with the URI. Are you sure? I think it's very important that we keep this discussion grounded in the pertinent RFCs and specifications. In this case, RFC 2616 says of status code 303: "10.3.4 303 See Other The response to the request can be found under a different URI and SHOULD be retrieved using a GET method on that resource. This method exists primarily to allow the output of a POST-activated script to redirect the user agent to a selected resource. The new URI is not a substitute reference for the originally requested resource." That seems to me at best very ambiguous as to what a 303 warrants regarding the URI originally referenced. So, you did a get to URI1 and got a 303. The spec says "the response to that request is at" URI2. Does that clearly say that URI1 has been "assigned" (if you like that term) and that it thus identifies a resource? I find the wording to be somewhat informal, and thus subject to differing interpretations, but to me 303 is pretty broad in suggesting "you might find joy over there". That's about it by my reading. Noah [1] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2616.html -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 28 September 2007 21:15:50 UTC