Re: Bookmark 'stability'
Jan Algermissen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.services.rest |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Paul Cohen wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Ruben Verborgh > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> That means we agree, because, to return a status code for a certain URI, >> it has to remain stable. >> >> What, however, would not be cool, >> is if /things/a gave a 404, >> but /things/b happily provided the resource. >> This would mean that the semantic validity of the /things/a mapping has not been maintained. > > The HTTP spec says that for 301 (Moved Permanently): > > "The requested resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any > future references to this resource SHOULD use one of the returned > URIs." > > and the spec for HTTP status Code 308 (Permanent Redirect) says: > > "The target resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any > future references to this resource SHOULD use one of the returned > URIs. > > I'm not sure what the practical convention for 301, or 308, is, The idea is to tell the client that the resource is still there, but that the client should use another URI to interact with it. The redirect should stay (instead of 410) because the resource is still there - just somewhere else. Jan > but to > me it sounds like the server could chose to return a 404 or maybe more > appropriately a 410 (Gone) in the future. > > /Paul > > -- > Paul Cohen > www.seibostudios.se > mobile: +46 730 787 035 > e-mail: [email protected]