Bruno Rodrigues wrote:

Citando Konstantin Vayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Hi,

Actually... What is really the reason for not having really descriptive status text?
There is already a list of definitions for status-codes...
So i believe it would not be a problem to make same for status-text... or is it?

Having OK as status-text is really confusing... but so also having Foo/Bar in some cases...

So... [ if i may really vote on anything ;) ]
i would vote +2 on making status-text be real rfc compliant (and thus descriptive)
or +1 for having at least Foo/Bar instead of OK

Are you offering to build that table in .c for kannel ? ;))))))))

Yes... that is just an array of strings, nothing more ;)
[ and i would put it in .h - where the definitions for http-status are ;) ]

Note: i am not offerring to make kannel parse these values from RFC although it is also a possability ;-))

Regards,
Konstantin Vayner
Appcell MT




Reply via email to