[wp-trac] [WordPress Trac] #16914: Updated List of HTTP status codes for wp_header_to_desc (2)

[WordPress Trac]

#16914: Updated List of HTTP status codes for wp_header_to_desc (2)
---------------------------+------------------
 Reporter:  hakre          |       Owner:
     Type:  enhancement    |      Status:  new
 Priority:  low            |   Milestone:  3.9
Component:  HTTP API       |     Version:  3.1
 Severity:  minor          |  Resolution:
 Keywords:  needs-refresh  |     Focuses:
---------------------------+------------------
Changes (by johnbillion):

 * keywords:  has-patch => needs-refresh
 * priority:  normal => low
 * severity:  normal => minor


Comment:

 [attachment:19601.diff] is a bit too liberal in its implementation. From
 that patch:

 Status codes that '''should''' be added:

  * `428`, `429`, `431`, and `511` are part of RFC 6585 which is still a
 proposal, but everyone seems to have implemented it anyway,
 [https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=64175 including PHP 5.5]. Safe to go in.
  * `418` is an April Fools' joke, but I'm sure it's safe enough to go in.

 Status codes that '''should not''' be added:

  * `122` and `450` are not actual HTTP response codes. They occur
 internally in IE7 and Windows respectively.
  * `103` and `308` are from
 [https://code.google.com/p/gears/wiki/ResumableHttpRequestsProposal an
 outdated proposal]. `308` is now part of [http://tools.ietf.org/html
 /draft-reschke-http-status-308-07 an experimental draft].
  * `425` remains unassigned and was only ever pre-allocated for RFC 2817.
  * `444` and `499` are, by their definitions, not actual status codes and
 are only used internally by Nginx.
  * `509` is unassigned. Despite this code and its description being
 included on some "HTTP status code" websites, its origin and use is
 unknown.
  * `510` is part of RFC 2774 which isn't implemented anywhere.

--
Ticket URL: <https://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/16914#comment:7>
WordPress Trac <https://core.trac.wordpress.org/>
WordPress publishing platform