> From: Samuel Padgett/Durham/IBM > To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Date: 09/07/2011 12:08 PM > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] awkward statement in Core on pre-filling creation dialogs > > > I think this may have been a case of RFC-2119 upcasing. I think the > > intent of that original statement is informative in saying that servers > > may (or may not) persist something on the server. Just because you > > receive a POST request, it is possible to respond with a new URL in the > > Location header with a 201 response. I might recommend that the upcasing > > and choice of words be reconsidered. Such as "Service providers MAY > > maintain the created form in a persistent storage." but does that really > > make it any better. Other suggestions welcome > > It looks like "MAY NOT" is not a keyword in RFC-2119 [1]. I propose we change > > "Service providers MAY NOT maintain the created form in a persistent > storage. Clients SHOULD expect that after some elapsed time, a GET on these > transient response URIs MAY result with response status codes of 404 (Not > found) or a 3xx (Redirect)." > > to simply > > "After some elapsed time, service providers MAY respond with a 404 (Not > Found) or 3xx (Redirect) to an HTTP GET request for these URIs." >
+1, perhaps just adding 410 (Gone) "After some elapsed time, service providers MAY respond with a 404 (Not Found), 410 (Gone) or 3xx (Redirect) to an HTTP GET request for these URIs." - Steve > > [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
