Subject: Re: IPP>MOD Status code for URI's too long?

From: Carl Kugler <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:35:50 -0400

I agree that it would be simpler to return 'client-error-bad-request' whenever
an attribute fails the length test.  Why was
'client-error-request-uri-too-long' introduced in the first place?  If there is
strong consensus that we don't need it, can we change the document?

 -Carl

---

From: Robert Herriot <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:57:19 -0700

I cannot remember why we introduced it.  But after talking with Tom, I would 
support changing the message 'client-error-request-uri-too-long'  to 
'client-error-request-value-too-long' and have it apply to all types that 
are text-like, namely text, name, charset, language, keywork, uri, 
uri-scheme, mime-media-type, text-with-language, and name-with-language.  
This message would be returned like 'bad-request' and indicate that no 
processing was going to take place, but it would give a user a bit more 
information about why theclient isn't behaving.  In the case of 
'client-error-request-value-too-long', the user might realize that if he 
sent in a short text field, things would work.

Bob Herriot

At 02:35 PM 5/11/98 , Carl Kugler wrote:
>C