Subject: RE: [Simple] Comments on xcap-list-usage

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 19:37:59 -0600

Jonathan Rosenberg [mailto:[email-masked]] wrote:

> I would propose adding the ability of the user to select the 
> URI. If it 
> cannot be assigned, the error response (409) will contain 
> some xml-meta 
> data. We'll define, in base xcap, a meta-data specifically 
> for the case 
> of "URI cannot be assigned", as I expect this to be a very 
> common case 
> for server assigned data.

I like this solution (and I agree that setting vanity URIs
is an important thing). I will note that there has been some
pushback from the HTTP crowd about automatic interpretation
of error code bodies, although it has never been clear to me
why. That said, RFC 2616 says the following about 409 response
bodies (emphasis mine), so this approach seems quite defensible:

   Ideally, the response entity would include enough information
   for the user OR USER AGENT to fix the problem...

/a

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 19:37:59 -0600

/a