Theo Zourzouvillys wrote:
2.2, para 3: [...] If a server wishes to reject such requests, the "403 Forbidden" response code is appropriate. It would be good to provide a way of returning to the client which ones it was unhappy with in the response, to save it having to go off and perform a HEAD on each original resource to find out which one has changed.
Good point. I've modified it to read: [...] If a server wishes to reject such requests, the "403" (Forbidden) response code is appropriate. Any "403" responses generated for this reason SHOULD contain a body of type "application/resource-lists+xml"; this body lists the offending URI or URIs. See RFC 4826 [6] for the definition of the "application/resource-lists+xml" MIME type.
2.2, para 5: Finally, for each such group, it initiates a subscription to the group's monitor-list URI; do you mean "monitor-group" instead of "monitor-list"?
Yep. Good catch. /a