4537Re: [rest-discuss] HTTP 202 Accepted and Polling for Completion.
- Sep 8, 2004On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 10:32:20AM -0700, Benjamin Yu wrote:
> > Not necessarily. It might make more sense for you to sayHmm, no. So long as the processing happens later, 202 is fine.
> > that every
> > resource under /report/ exists with empty state until
> > such time as it's
> > modified. A Wiki could work like this.
> Ok, I can see cases where one would represent the initial
> state of resources as a 204. I'll keep that in mind. But in
> such cases, wouldn't the original response to a
> /reportmaker request be a 201 Created instead of a 202
> > Another option is 404, as that would acknowledge that theI'd do as the other poster suggested.
> > resource
> > hasn't yet been "created". I've used both 204 and 404
> > depending upon
> > the situation. This feels more like a 404 to me though.
> Using a 404 sounds like a good idea. But wouldn't this be
> confusing for clients? That is, how can a client
> differentiate between the following cases?
> 1. No report was created with this URI and nothing is in
> the works.
> 2. A report is in process for this address.
> Would providing a listing service
> (/inprogresslist?queryparams) be a viable solution?
Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
- << Previous post in topic