[5133] in www-talk@info.cern.ch
Re: Progress reporting in future HTTP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rick Troth)
Wed Aug 10 11:04:00 1994
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 16:58:08 +0200
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: troth@rice.edu
From: Rick Troth <troth@rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
> We chatted about this back in April on www-talk. George Phillips
> proposed an extra header
>
> (normal headers here)
> Status: 10% complete
> Status: 20% complete
> ...
> Status: Search Completed
> (rest of headers)
>
> HTML stuff
I really like this. The only problem with it is that
it's in English. It should be something like:
(normal headers here)
Status: 101 10 10% complete
Status: 101 20 20% complete
...
Status: 102 Search Completed
(rest of headers)
HTML stuff
Where "101" is an informational message (some percentage complete)
which has a single two-digit numeric parameter, and "102" is an
informational message (finis) which has no parameters. The text
following any parameters may be displayed by the client in absence
of a message code -to- local language mapping function.
The numbers 101 and 102 are somewhat arbitrary. I allowed that
someone may have used 100, though I've never seen it from a server
or in the spec. They could perhaps be merged where "101 100"
means "finished" (100%). (tho we're not in immediate danger
of running out of message code space)
> I think it was decided that
> the use of "Status:" was conflicting and "Progress:" should be used
> instead.
Fine. Then c/Status:/Progress:/ in the snippet above.
> Mark
> Mark J Cox ---------------------- <URL:http://www.eia.brad.ac.uk/mark.html>
> Industrial Technology, Bradford University, UK +44 127 438 4070/fax 391333
--
Rick Troth <troth@rice.edu>, Rice University, Information Systems
