Re: p2: deprecating 205 Reset Content?

[James M Snell <[e-mail]>]

Deprecating it in spec doesn't harm those existing systems in any way,  it
just means,  at worse,  eventually future iterations of those systems would
need to find a better approach to that particular problem.  Let's not be
afraid to dump stuff we really don't need. That said.  I do agree that
there are more important things to be focusing on.
On Apr 29, 2013 10:15 AM, "Roy T. Fielding" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The most common use of 205 is within custom HTTP systems, not browsers.
> We could only do harm by deprecating it.
>
> ....Roy
>
> On Apr 28, 2013, at 10:34 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> > p2 defines this status code:
> >
> >> The 205 (Reset Content) status code indicates that the server has
> fulfilled the request and desires that the user agent reset the "document
> view", which caused the request to be sent, to its original state as
> received from the origin server.
> >
> > but AIUI it isn't implemented in any browser. See:
> >
> http://benramsey.com/blog/2008/05/http-status-204-no-content-and-205-reset-content/
> >
> > While it might have uses outside of browsers, the identified use case
> *is* data entry, which screams "browser" (at least to me).
> >
> > AFAICT it was first proposed here:
> >
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg-old/1995MayAug/0575.html
> > and resolutely failed to catch on.
> >
> > This being the case, should we consider noting its lack of
> implementation support, or even deprecating it (as we did for 305, which
> showed a similar lack of interest/deployment)?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > P.S. I don't want to spend a lot of time on this; if people have strong
> feelings against both noting lack of support and deprecating it, just say
> so and I'm happy to drop it. OTOH if you think it's a good idea, say so and
> it'll help us make a decision more quickly.
> >
> > --
> > Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>