Re: Status: -> Progress:

• Mail folder: WWW Talk Apr 94-present
• Next message: George Phillips: "Re: Status: -> Progress:"
• Previous message: Brian Behlendorf: "Re: beyond IMAGEMAP "
• Maybe in reply to: George Phillips: "Status: -> Progress:"
• Reply: George Phillips: "Re: Status: -> Progress:"

Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 09:31:59 +0200
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Message-id: <2791.9405100724@molnir.brunel.ac.uk>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: Paul.Wain@brunel.ac.uk
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: Paul "S." Wain <Paul.Wain@brunel.ac.uk>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: Status: -> Progress:
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Mime-Version: 1.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]

@ For a little background, telnet to www.cs.ubc.ca on port 80 and type
@ 
@ GET /test-status HTTP/1.0<CR><LF><CR><LF>
@ 
@ and I think you'll get the idea.  Or check out the www-talk archive.

I have just realised what it is with this that bothers me :)

==== O/P from above example: ====

HTTP/1.0 200 Document Follows
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html
Status: 10% done
Status: 20% done
...

==== O/P from above example: ====

In the case of what we are doing here, it would be nice to send back
these Status/Progress reports _BUT_ the search isnt sure of the correct
HTTP response code when it starts. The response code depends on the
results of the search. (eg: 200 is OK,  302 is a referal for correct
retrival later on, 40x is a failure etc.)

I cant quite see how this method would allow you to be alter the
response on the fly. The only way that I can see this scheme working
correctly would be to define a new status code that can be superceeded
in the header, like say:

==== O/P from example ====

HTTP/1.0 205 Status Information
MIME-Version: 1.0
Status: 10% done
Status: 20% done
Status: 30% done
Status: 40% done
Status: 50% done
Status: 60% done
Status: 70% done
Status: 80% done
Status: 90% done
Status: 100% done

HTTP/1.0 302 Found
Location: http://...../
MIME-Version: 1.0
...

==== O/P from example ====

But I can also see problems with this. :) So I cant see it being a
possibility for a lot of heavy DB usage, where you cant expect to know 
you have a hit immediatly.

Actually looking at my copy of the HTTP spec I cant see anything that
says you cant alter the status code on the fly but I have a feeling that
it would break most if not all browsers :) :) :)

Anyone for HTTP/1.1 ? :)

Paul

.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|_______Paul_S._Wain,_(X.500_Project_Engineer_and_WWW/HTTP_chappie),______|
| Computer Centre, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middx., UB8 3PH, ENGLAND. |
|___VOICE:_+44_895_274000_extn_2391_______EMAIL: Paul.Wain@brunel.ac.uk __|
|                 http://http2.brunel.ac.uk:8080/paul/                    |
`-------------------------------------------------------------------------'