3834Re: [rest-discuss] 403 vs. 409
- Aug 2, 2003Mark,
What would you be telling intermediaries if you used 200 to reply
to a POST of some malformed content:
a. that something was successfully appended or annotated?
b. that some data processing was successfully performed?
Why wouldn't 400 in this case be the ideal way to drive the
application in asking for the data again after correcting syntax?
How does 400 prevent the application from making progress?
Also, in general, where did I get the impression that an application
unsure about specific status codes can/should punt and use the x00
in the appropriate category? Doesn't seem to say that in 2616 for
the 400 family.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Baker" <distobj@...>
Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 12:38 AM
Subject: Re: [rest-discuss] 403 vs. 409
> Ah, Seairth was asking *that* question. I didn't realize. We should
> add this to the FAQ, as we've had this twice before I think.
> Sometimes it's 400, sometimes it's 200. It depends on the method too.
> For PUT, I'd use 400, because to return 200 would be telling
> intermediaries that what was sent, was stored. For POST, more than
> likely I'd use 200, because I may want to resolve the bad data problem
> by, for example, driving the application to ask for the data again,
> and perhaps I want to count the retries or some such. If I used 400,
> then the application makes no progress, so I can't do that. I think.
> Funny how such a seemingly simple question opens up the whole "state"
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>