- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:50:49 +0200
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- CC: www-tag@w3.org
From the meeting minutes:
> DC:How does IANA service this? A 200 response would imply this is an information resource
> ... So I suggested we should get them to do the 303 redirect
>
> JR: I spoke to someone at IETF, and I think they are unaware of the issue and are waiting to hear from us
My understanding is that (as of now) the IANA is unwilling to guarantee
*anything* about how they serve web content. I'd be surprised if they
cared about the fine points of the 303 status code; for now they are
even discouraging use of the registration URLs in specifications
(<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226#section-5.1>):
Note 2: When referring to an existing registry, providing a URL
to precisely identify the registry is helpful. Such URLs,
however, should usually be removed from the RFC prior to final
publication, since IANA URLs are not guaranteed to be stable in
the future. In cases where it is important to include a URL in
the document, IANA should concur on its inclusion.
BR, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 8 October 2008 11:51:33 UTC