#6 closed design (fixed)
Fragments allowed in Location
Reported by: | mnot@… | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Milestone: | 01 | |
Component: | p2-semantics | Severity: | |
Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
In the description of the Location header [section 14.30], the ABNF for the Location header is given as:
Location = "Location" ":" absoluteURI
This and the accompanying text are incorrect because the definition of 'absoluteURI', given in RFC 2396 does not include fragment identifiers. The correct syntax for the Location header is:
Location = "Location" ":" absoluteURI [ "#" fragment ]
There are circumstances in which a fragment identifier in a Location URL would not be appropriate:
- With a 201 Created response, because in this usage the Location header specifies the URL for the entire created resource.
- With a 300 Multiple Choices, since the choice decision is intended to be made on resource characteristics and not fragment characteristics.
- With 305 Use Proxy.
At present, the behavior in the case where there was a fragment with the original URI, e.g.: http://host1.example.com/resource1#fragment1 where /resource1 redirects to http://host2.example.com/resource2#fragment2 is 'fragment1' discarded? Do you find fragment2 and then find fragment1 within it? We don't have fragment combination rules.
Change History (5)
comment:1 Changed 15 years ago by fielding@…
- Milestone set to 01
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
- version set to 00
comment:2 Changed 15 years ago by mnot@…
- version changed from 00 to d00
comment:3 Changed 15 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Component set to auth
This fix is not complete, see <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-01.html#rfc.change.location-fragments.2>.
comment:4 Changed 15 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Component changed from auth to semantics
comment:5 Changed 15 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- origin set to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg-old/1999MayAug/0103.html
Fixed in [73]