Re: Informal Last Call for HTTP Preference Header

Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name> Tue, 31 January 2012 23:58 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E719221F857A for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:58:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=4.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JrHZAMpWn0Tq for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:58:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C8BE21F8577 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:58:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1RsNac-0004Zw-Uq for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:58:18 +0000
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <cyrus@daboo.name>) id 1RsNaP-0004WB-7h for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:58:05 +0000
Received: from daboo.name ([173.13.55.49]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <cyrus@daboo.name>) id 1RsNaN-0001js-6u for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:58:04 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96FAE211D5D7; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:57:39 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at daboo.name
Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6c7wk4ICgYfC; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:57:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from vp0101wa-dhcp96.apple.com (unknown [17.244.24.57]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6928D211D5CC; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:57:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:58:11 -0800
From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
To: James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <FF3263CC845E37A2C52BA166@vp0101wa-dhcp96.apple.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABP7RbeCuXbrp+w0wX1F-YyOFjKn7NDif2Ye+EaymVi3Nv7-qQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABP7RbeCuXbrp+w0wX1F-YyOFjKn7NDif2Ye+EaymVi3Nv7-qQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; size="1041"
Received-SPF: none client-ip=173.13.55.49; envelope-from=cyrus@daboo.name; helo=daboo.name
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1RsNaN-0001js-6u d08c32034c95123b1c13364119d4a5f5
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Informal Last Call for HTTP Preference Header
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/FF3263CC845E37A2C52BA166@vp0101wa-dhcp96.apple.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/12287
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1RsNac-0004Zw-Uq@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:58:18 +0000

Hi James,

--On January 31, 2012 1:28:17 PM -0800 James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> 
wrote:

> I just posted an update for the HTTP Prefer Header altering the
> intended status from "Informational" to "Standards Track". No
> additional changes were made. As I have not received any further
> technical input on the specification, I am issuing an *Informal* Last
> Call for comments before I request that it be kicked up the chain for
> review.
>
> Mark Nottingham has agreed to serve as the document shepherd for
> helping to move it forward.
>
> Current Draft: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-snell-http-prefer-11.txt

Can you clarify the meaning of an ETag header returned in the response to a 
PUT with a Prefer:return-representation header. Would that ETag refer to 
the resource whose representation is being returned? If so, could we please 
include ETag in the example. If not, then we really need a way to get the 
actual ETag for the returned representation - otherwise 
Prefer:return-representation is not that useful.

-- 
Cyrus Daboo