Re: is (web client) ready for use even for the simplest task?

[Ian Price]

Nala Ginrut <address@hidden> writes:

> But RFC 2616 wrote:
> ---------------------------cut----------------------------
> body is not defined by this specification, but might be defined by
>    future extensions to HTTP. Content negotiation MAY be used to select
>    the appropriate response format. If no response body is included, the
>    response MUST include a Content-Length field with a field-value of
>    "0".
> ---------------------------end----------------------------

This section is a red herring, since it refers to the response to an
OPTIONS request, not to a POST request itself.

Section 4.3 Message Body says

   The presence of a message-body in a request is signaled by the
   inclusion of a Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding header field in
   the request's message-headers.

What this means is, if you don't send a content length or transfer
encoding header, then the server should not expect a body. I will note,
in particular, that not sending a message is a distinct operation from
sending a message of length 0.

-- 
Ian Price -- shift-reset.com

"Programming is like pinball. The reward for doing it well is
the opportunity to do it again" - from "The Wizardy Compiled"