Talk:HTTP location

Untitled[edit]

What's with the ridiculous [citation needed] next to the bit where it says the Location field can be used with a relative URI in major browsers? It's not [citation needed], it's fact! Try it yourself! 210.84.50.149 (talk) 22:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trying it yourself would count as original research. Wikipedia wants to be a compilation of references to other published research. You may or may not agree, but that's how Wikipedia wants it. So, yes, "citation needed" is technically correct: the claim about "major" browsers (what's that?) may be true, but someone is requesting an external source that backs it up. 129.219.155.89 (talk) 18:04, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anir 2409:4043:2D86:DD1:0:0:7E88:90D (talk) 06:57, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relative URL example[edit]

The relative URL example currently reads:

Client request:

GET /blog HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.com

Server response:

HTTP/1.1 302 Found
Location: /blog/

Do popular browsers interpret the response as "www.example.com/blog/"? What is used as context for a base for the relative interpretation? The Host: header value? Thanks, --Abdull (talk) 12:11, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What does "the upcoming revision of HTTP/1.1" even mean? I couldn't find any version that is even actively being worked on on w3.org. Attila Oláh (talk) 13:23, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Absolute URI[edit]

When the URL from the Location is used in a GET then a path of / must be used if one isn't present, but does this mean that the absolute URI in the Location can omit it, e.g. http://google.com -- Ralph Corderoy (talk) 16:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SubjeCt[edit]

SubjeCL SubjecL SubjecL SubjeCL SubjecL 196.129.208.5 (talk) 09:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Subject[edit]

Descri 01068609070 ption 196.129.211.8 (talk) 13:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]