9675Re: [rest-discuss] 30x Status codes
- Oct 2, 2007On 10/2/07, Nick Gall <nick.gall@...> wrote:
>In theory, yes. In practice in the wild, not so much. See this thread;
> On 10/2/07, Peter Lacey <placey@...> wrote:
> > Why redirect? Quoting the RWS book " The 303 status code is a good way
> > to canonicalize your resources. You can make them available through many
> > URIs, but only have one "real" URI per representation. All the other
> > URIs use a 303 to point to the canonical URI for that representation.
> > For instance, a 303 might redirect a request for
> > http://www.example.com/software/current.tar.gz to the URI
> > http://www.example.com/software/1.0.2.tar.gz ."
> Wouldn't using the Content-Location HTTP header field also be a "good way to canonicalize your resources"?
> The Content-Location entity-header field MAY be used to supply the resource location for the entity enclosed in the message when that entity is accessible from a location separate from the requested resource's URI. A server SHOULD provide a Content-Location for the variant corresponding to the response entity; especially in the case where a resource has multiple entities associated with it, and those entities actually have separate locations by which they might be individually accessed, the server SHOULD provide a Content-Location for the particular variant which is returned.
> It has the advantage of NOT requiring a round trip.
Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>