Re: Clarification requests from Paul Bennett...
Jim Gettys (jg@pa.dec.com)
Tue, 8 Sep 1998 08:11:39 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format, created by Pachyderm.
The parts are separated by "--1" lines.
The first part is a covering note, the others are attachments.
--1
Content-Type: text/plain
> From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
> Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 00:42:53 -0700
> To: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>
> Cc: mogul@pa.dec.com, paulle@microsoft.com, frystyk@w3.org, dmk@bell-labs.com
> Subject: Re: Clarification requests from Paul Bennett...
> -----
material elided
> > * Section 10.2.2 "201 Created" says nothing about the format of the
> > response entity. (section 10.3.1 "300 Multiple Choices" in a
> > similar position is explicitly non-committal.
> >*** Do we want to crib the text from 300? ***
>
> 300 is a redirect, which implies the client isn't done yet. I guess the
> text from the second para. of 300 is okay without the last two sentences
> having to do with automatic redirection.
>
I added:
"The response SHOULD include an entity containing a list of resource
characteristics and location(s) from which the user or user agent can
choose the one most appropriate. The entity format is specified by the
media type given in the Content-Type header field. "
To clarify this issue.
- Jim
--1
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: attachment
Received: by src-mail.pa.dec.com; id AA31238; Fri, 4 Sep 1998 00:45:31 -0700
Received: from mail2.digital.com by pobox1.pa.dec.com (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/07Nov97-1157AM)
id AA04270; Fri, 4 Sep 1998 00:44:52 -0700
Received: from paris.ics.uci.edu (paris.ics.uci.edu [128.195.1.50])
by mail2.digital.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/WV1.0g) with SMTP id AAA13246;
Fri, 4 Sep 1998 00:44:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kiwi.ics.uci.edu by paris.ics.uci.edu id aa29448;
4 Sep 98 0:42 PDT
To: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>
Cc: mogul@pa.dec.com, paulle@microsoft.com, frystyk@w3.org, dmk@bell-labs.com
Subject: Re: Clarification requests from Paul Bennett...
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 03 Sep 1998 08:26:19 PDT."
<9809031526.AA21910@pachyderm.pa.dec.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 00:42:53 -0700
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
Message-Id: <9809040042.aa29448@paris.ics.uci.edu>
Status:
In message <9809031526.AA21910@pachyderm.pa.dec.com>, Jim Gettys writes:
>My opinions in *** ***
>Comments, anyone?
> - Jim
>
>Extracted from Paul's mail.
>Clarifications:
>(material elided)...
>
> * Sections 9.3 "GET", 9.4 "HEAD" and 9.7 "DELETE" don't explicitly
> rule out the presence of an entity-body, as section 9.8 "TRACE"
> does.
>** at this late date, I'm uncomfortable introducing changes here, and in
> fact, it may be useful to allow (though exisiting software may not work).
> first, do no harm...***
Agreed.
> * Section 10.2.2 "201 Created" says nothing about the format of the
> response entity. (section 10.3.1 "300 Multiple Choices" in a
> similar position is explicitly non-committal.
>*** Do we want to crib the text from 300? ***
300 is a redirect, which implies the client isn't done yet. I guess the
text from the second para. of 300 is okay without the last two sentences
having to do with automatic redirection.
> * Section 10.3.6 "305 Use Proxy": "The Location field gives the URI
> of the proxy." But nowhere can I find a specification for this
> URI form; presumably it's an HTTP URI without an abs_path part.
>** No, I don't think so; would inhibit evolution of the web to
> future URI forms; you ought to be able to redirect to other
> schemes. I think that 3.2.1 defines well enough the
> reference to generic URI's (finally draft standard!)***
Right.
....Roy
--1--