Jeremy, The question was why Merb didn't include a WebDAV code in its supported extensions. Do you think we should? I've been rethinking this issue and would be really interested in your feedback.
-- Yehuda On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Jeremy Kemper <[email protected]> wrote: > > You can safely ignore the WebDAV bogeyman if all you'd like is to > cherry-pick some of its more useful HTTP extensions. > > HTTP 1.1 is extensible; 422 status is introduced and specified by the > WebDAV HTTP extensions; 422 is a valid HTTP status. > > That's not to say Merb should include it, but it certainly shouldn't > discourage you from effectively using the HTTP tools at your disposal. > > jeremy > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Yehuda Katz <[email protected]> wrote: > > 422 is not a valid HTTP status code. It is a WebDAV status code. Are you > > writing a WebDAV server? > > > > -- Yehuda > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Mr_Tibs <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Why isn't there an unprocessable_entity status code/status class in > >> Merb? What are we supposed to return for xml requests in case save() > >> fails? (I am aware that I can pass 422 to render() directly) > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Tiberiu > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Yehuda Katz > > Developer | Engine Yard > > (ph) 718.877.1325 > > > > > > > > > > > -- Yehuda Katz Developer | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
