Ben Ramsey

The Content-Type of 300 Multiple Choices is not defined by HTTP, so it's really up to the developers of each application to return a Content-Type they think is suitable for...

That said, RFC 2616 states "If the server has a preferred choice of representation, it SHOULD include the specific URI for that representation in the Location field". Perhaps we assume...

See my comment above. RFC 2616 states "If the server has a preferred choice of representation, it SHOULD include the specific URI for that representation in the Location field; user...

I think this is a case where we're not going to be able to get it right, and maybe that's why no one else has yet, either. I think this...

> @ramsey so this will validate your choice and use of 300 Multiple Choices me thinks I'm not quite clear what my "choice" is referring to. :-) Also, I'm not...

> What I suggest is the same thing we usually did, provide standard messages generated in html which the developer can overwrite with their own implementation. Awesome! Now, we're speaking...

You've written an awful lot to consider, but I'll be brief: - I actually do like HAL a lot, and I'm watching its development very closely. I am currently designing...

Nice! I've never looked at RFC 2295. I'll need to dig deeper into it, since it looks like it has a lot of good, relevant information. If we choose to...

The difficulty may come in supporting conditional requests. For example, if a conditional PUT request includes an `If-Match` header, then we need to generate the content first, MD5 it, and...

> @ramsey There you go again with "implementer really needs to be the one making the decisions" which I don't understand. If you think you can come up with a...