Hi all, Thanks for the clarification debate on status code classes. I have just fixed the issues in SVN trunk and closed the report: http://restlet.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=422
Best regards, Jerome > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Rob Heittman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Envoyé : jeudi 17 janvier 2008 05:26 > À : [email protected] > Objet : Re: Bad implementation of Status error checking > > The httpbis drafts mentioned in another thread clarify the > intent of Berners-Lee, Fielding et al. in support of Paul's view: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-sema > ntics-01.txt (Expires July 15, 2008) > > HTTP status codes are extensible. HTTP applications are > not required > to understand the meaning of all registered status codes, > though such > understanding is obviously desirable. However, applications MUST > > understand the class of any status code, as indicated by the first > digit, and treat any unrecognized response as being > equivalent to the > x00 status code of that class, with the exception that an > unrecognized response MUST NOT be cached. For example, if an > > unrecognized status code of 431 is received by the client, it can > safely assume that there was something wrong with its request and > treat the response as if it had received a 400 status > code. In such > > cases, user agents SHOULD present to the user the entity returned > with the response, since that entity is likely to include human- > readable information which will explain the unusual status. > While this is not strictly canon yet, I think Restlet should > track this clarified behavior. > > - Rob > > >
