Sarven Capadisli

Would it make sense to reframe this issue to "Precedence of response codes"? It is not entirely about errors as this example shows https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/107#issuecomment-567454889 : >Server MAY redirect a request...

Haven't verified the following. Check back later: * https://web.archive.org/web/20200314033029/https://raw.githubusercontent.com/for-GET/http-decision-diagram/master/httpdd.png * https://web.archive.org/web/20190729063353/https://www.loggly.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/http-decision-diagram.png

Revisiting this issue with specifics to the example in https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/146#issue-561361399 based on current spec: Server will ignore the Link header because the slash semantics determine the type of resource. Only...

LDP describes server behaviour when a client includes the `type` link parameter in the header of a `POST` request targeting a container. The behaviour may be generalised or interpreted for...

The response payload can provide the reason for the client error. Issue: https://github.com/solid/specification/issues/28 using RDF messages. URI Slash Semantics (SP). When the request's `Content-Type` is inconsistent with the path component...

>I feel you're making this too much of theoretical exercise I suggested that for consistency to be useful in the SP, it needs to work with normative requirements. If that's...

Can you refer to the tests corresponding to the requirements in the SP?

Case: https://github.com/solid/web-access-control-spec/issues/93

https://github.com/solid/vocab/issues/20#issuecomment-1111993208

As this issue also covers issue #15 but with the advantage of more context, I suggest to acknowledge the discussion at 15 and then close 15.