Re: 1xx response semantics

[Bjoern Hoehrmann <[e-mail]>]

* Mark Nottingham wrote:
>One (of many) of the issues with 1xx responses is that people don't know
>how to surface two responses to one request in APIs and tools. 
>
>I think we could make things a bit easier for folks if we stated that
>the headers in a 1xx response are semantically not significant; i.e.,
>it's OK for APIs, etc. to drop them on the floor, because the only
>information is in the status code.
>
>This would mean that people shouldn't put headers on a 1xx response and
>expect applications to see them -- which I think is already the case
>today.

The WebSocket protocol as currently proposed makes use of headers in the
101 Switching Protocols response and I suspect "Sec-WebSocket-Protocol"
will end up with the application somehow, but I haven't looked lately. I
also note that with protocol switches, you don't get two responses, just
the one and after that it's no longer HTTP, so maybe they can be special
under such a rule.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:[e-mail] · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: [phone] · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/