Re: test of new Location header usage from Joseph R Barge on 1995-08-11 (www-talk@w3.org from July to August 1995)

From: Joseph R Barge <jrbarge@umich.edu>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 23:35:28 -0400 (EDT)
To: hartill@lanl.gov, decoux@moulon.inra.fr, www-talk@w3.org
Message-Id: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950810233508.21034C-100000@joust.rs.itd.umich.edu>

Thanks for resonding

On Wed, 9 Aug 1995, Joseph R Barge wrote:

> Could someone please take me off of this list. My reason for signing on 
> has since disappeared so I would greatly appreciate instructions to help 
> me, or if someone just did it I would be eternally grateful!! Thank You
> 
> On Wed, 9 Aug 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:
> 
> >  
> > >  Only historical reason : the first spec (CGI 1.0) defined only `Content-type'
> > > and `Location'. `Status' was added for CGI 1.1
> > > 
> > >  I don't know why you want add a status code, when Location imply a code 302.
> > 
> > Location doesn't necessarily imply "302". "301" is prefectly acceptable,
> > and preferably in many cases.
> > 
> > 
> > rob
> > 
> > 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 10 August 1995 23:34:14 UTC