- From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
- Date: 1999年5月24日 17:16:12 -0700
- To: ccjason@us.ibm.com
- Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
- Message-ID: <005701bea643$cbffa120$d115c380@ics.uci.edu>
> > The entire intent of this requirement was extensibility. We wanted to > > ensure that implementors wouldn't add code that rejected a MKCOL immediately > > if it had a request body, since this would make future extension of MKCOL > > impossible. > > In that case IE5 needs to fix this. :-) IE5 closes the > connection before even > reading the body. It apparently is not prepared to accept a multi-status > response. I had been thinking this was a server-side extensibility issue. I don't think it's unreasonable for a client which submits a MKCOL without a request body to not accept a 207 response, when the spec. states that a 201 (Created) is returned. So, if a client submits a MKCOL without request body, it really only needs to expect a 201 (Created) as a response code (although it should do the right thing and treat all other 2xx responses as a 200, and a good implementation would also read the body of a 207). If a client submits a MKCOL with request body, it should expect either a 201 or a 207 -- both are legitimate responses. - Jim
Received on Monday, 24 May 1999 20:24:21 UTC