Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"final" status code/response should be defined in semantics #245

Closed
reschke opened this issue Sep 2, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

"final" status code/response should be defined in semantics #245

reschke opened this issue Sep 2, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@reschke
Copy link
Contributor

@reschke reschke commented Sep 2, 2019

...that will also allow [Caching] to move a reference.

@royfielding
Copy link
Member

@royfielding royfielding commented Feb 4, 2020

Section 9.2 (Informational status codes) is already describing these as "final response" and "interim response", and I think we use interim elsewhere for this type of requirement. I would prefer that we stick with the interim/final terminology instead of non-final/final.

https://httpwg.org/http-core/draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics-latest.html#status.1xx

@reschke
Copy link
Contributor Author

@reschke reschke commented Feb 4, 2020

@royfielding - PR adjusted accordingly.

@mnot
Copy link
Member

@mnot mnot commented Mar 19, 2020

Can this be closed?

@reschke
Copy link
Contributor Author

@reschke reschke commented Mar 19, 2020

Yes.

@reschke reschke closed this Mar 19, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants