Re: [webfinger] Server Response language

As in every other case where the WebFinger spec is merely re-iterating
standard HTTP rules, I suggest just removing this language. -Tim

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>wrote:

> Folks,****
>
> ** **
>
> We had this previously:****
>
> ** **
>
> “If the client queries the WebFinger server and provides a URI for which
> the server has no information, the server MUST return a 404 status code.”*
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> Someone posted to the list that we should talk about positive replies and
> mention that a client might be rejected with a 401.  So, I wrote this text
> to be appended to the end of that above paragraph:****
>
> ** **
>
> “If the server is able to provide information in response to a request, it
> MUST do so using an appropriate 2xx HTTP status code and including the
> requested representation in the body of the response.  A server MAY also
> return other HTTP status codes, as appropriate, such as a 401 to indicate
> that the client is not authorized to issue a request to the server.”****
>
> ** **
>
> Is this agreeable?  Please suggest wording changes, if not.****
>
> ** **
>
> Paul****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> webfinger mailing list
> webfinger@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger
>
>