Re: [webfinger] Server Response language

["Paul E. Jones" <[e-mail]>]

Stephane,

I believe anyone writing a web service should understand that proposed
sentence.  We could add it as part of an example, but that text is not
normative.  I believe it would be better to introduce a clear statement in
section 4.2 similar to the way I worded it.  Any suggested changes to the
wording?

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 'Stephane Bortzmeyer' [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:19 AM
> To: Paul E. Jones
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language
> 
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 12:03:46AM -0400,
>  Paul E. Jones <[e-mail]> wrote
>  a message of 64 lines which said:
> 
> >    If the "resource" parameter is a value for which the server has no
> >    information, the server MUST indicate that it was unable to match
> >    the request as per Section 10.4.5 of RFC 2616.
> >
> > This allows the use of 404 or 410, as appropriate.  I think that is the
> > right thing to do.
> 
> An aternative, if people insist that it is clear in RFC 3986 and that
> it should not be restated in Webfinger, is to provide an example:
> 
> For instance, in the OpenID COnnect example, at the end of 3.1, add:
> 
> And if the account does not exist:
> 
>      GET /.well-known/webfinger?
>             resource=acct%3Adoesnotexist%40example.com&
>             rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer
>             HTTP/1.1
>      Host: example.com
> 
>    The server might respond like this:
> 
>      HTTP/1.1 404 Not found
>      Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *
> 
>    Without a body.