- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 12:18:23 +0000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org, www-tag@w3.org
Julian Reschke writes: > On 2013-11-04 17:53, Henry S. Thompson wrote: >> ... > > Reactive conneg isn't just about 300s and 406s. Another example would > be a representation returned with a 200 response that contains links > to alternate versions of the content. That's what the How is this in scope for discussion _in the HTTP spec._? People (not user agents, note) use 200 responses for a huge range of interesting, powerful, innovative things. We don't look in the HTTP spec. to find a discussion of them. > "If the user agent is not satisfied by the initial response > representation, it can perform a GET request on one or more of the > alternative resources, selected based on metadata included in the > list, to obtain a different form of representation for that > response. Selection of alternatives might be performed automatically > by the user agent or manually by the user selecting from a generated > (possibly hypertext) menu." "based on metadata included in the list"! That's a specific reference to a 300 response. There is no "list" in a 200 response, not that a user agent can detect anyway. And, as I said in the last message, I'm not aware of _any_ user agent that does _anything_ specific to 300 responses. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2013 12:19:19 UTC