I would have to agree with mat. But to each their own. The return
codes frequently make no sense from twitter, so i guess the fact that
it doesn't make sense it is irrelevant, so long as it is consistent.
On Dec 3, 6:29 pm, mat mat.st...@gmail.com wrote:
Given that 400 is bad request, and the client SHOULD NOT repeat the
request without modifications (w3.org's emphasis), and 503 means
service unavailable, try again later, and can include a retry-after
header, would it not have made more sense to change the response code
of the REST API to the more correct one?
On Dec 3, 10:41 pm, Wilhelm Bierbaum wilh...@twitter.com wrote:
In an effort to simplify our APIs, we are standardizing the response
codes returned by our various systems. Historically, the Search API
has returned 503 for rate limiting whereas the REST API has returned
400. So, we are changing the response codes sent back from the Search
API.
Starting Wednesday, December 16th, 2009 the search API will respond
with error code 400 in the event that the number of requests you have
made exceeds the quota afforded by your rate limit.
Please update your response handler accordingly.
If you have any questions, please feel free to post them on twitter-
development-talk.
