Ignore:
Timestamp:
Dec 20, 2011, 2:40:00 AM (8 years ago)
Author:
julian.reschke@…
Message:

Note that some recipients are lax in processing the Location header field (see #185)

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p2-semantics.xml

    r1495 r1496  
    27092709</artwork></figure><figure><artwork type="example">  Location: /index.html
    27102710</artwork></figure>
     2711<x:note>
     2712  <t>
     2713    <x:h>Note:</x:h> Some recipients attempt to recover from Location fields
     2714    that are not valid URI references. This specification does not mandate or
     2715    define such processing, but does allow it (see <xref target="intro.conformance.and.error.handling"/>).
     2716  </t>
     2717</x:note>
    27112718<t>
    27122719   There are circumstances in which a fragment identifier in a Location URI
     
    47124719  <list style="symbols">
    47134720    <t>
     4721      <eref target="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/185"/>:
     4722      "Location header payload handling"
     4723    </t>
     4724    <t>
    47144725      <eref target="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/255"/>:
    47154726      "Clarify status code for rate limiting" (change backed out because
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.