- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:00:21 +0100
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Hi, RFC2616 and the current draft are somewhat inconsistent when talking about certain status codes. I see: 100 (Continue) 100 (continue) 204 (No Content) 204 (no content) 206 (Partial Content) 206 (Partial content) 206 (Partial) 304 (Not Modified) 304 (not modified) 305 (Proxy Redirect) 305 (Use Proxy) 400 (Bad Request) 400 (bad request) 406 (Not Acceptable) 406 (not acceptable) 501 (Not Implemented) 501 (Unimplemented) I'd like to standardize on what appears in the section titles describing the status codes. So: 100 (Continue) <- 100 (continue) 204 (No Content) <- 204 (no content) 206 (Partial Content) <- 206 (Partial content) 206 (Partial Content) <- 206 (Partial) 304 (Not Modified) <- 304 (not modified) 305 (Proxy Redirect) <- 305 (Use Proxy) 400 (Bad Request) <- 400 (bad request) 406 (Not Acceptable) <- 406 (not acceptable) 501 (Not Implemented) <- 501 (Unimplemented) Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 4 November 2007 19:00:39 UTC