HTTP Status

Dev tools

reference documentation

SHOW HN2012

58points
22comments
#398of 1,677 in 2012
Top 24%of 2012 by points

How HN took it

RoastedHalf or more of the comments are critical

3 positive, 2 neutral or asking, 0 mixed, 6 critical, out of 11 comments about the project. Thread score -0.17.

Docs: 1 for, 3 againstIdea: 0 for, 3 againstDesign: 2 for, 0 against

The thread, comment by comment

Each row is a top-level comment and its replies, in HN's order. Select a cell to open that comment on HN.

positive neutral or mixed critical about another commenter or something else the maker

What HN said

What people liked

  • Format puts browser respect for RFCs up front

    From 1 comment
    • I especially like that the entries put front and center the degree to which the official RFCs are actually respected by browsers. That content is all (obviously) in Wikipedia and…
      azernik on HN
  • Clean design; suggested inline explanations

    From 1 comment
    • Beautiful! A suggestion, though: Use the whitespace to the right of the status codes to display their explanations, rather than linking to a new page; it would be easier to…
      fendrak on HN

Objections

  • Some explanations are wrong, e.g. 304 described as redirect

    From 1 comment
    • Well, for 304 the explaination is "this and all future requests should redirect to given URI", which is just wrong. Simply "Not modified" would be better.
      skoob on HN
  • Includes made-up non-RFC codes without caveats; less useful than Wikipedia

    From 1 comment
    • It's not even as useful as the Wikipedia list as the main page fails to specify which codes are from WebDAV, etc., and it even copies some made-up non-RFC codes without including…
      barwell on HN
  • Redirect (300) wording needs clarifying

    From 1 comment
    • This really needs to clarify the wording on the 300 redirects...
      klodolph on HN

Requests

  • Include relevant RFC extracts

    From 1 comment
  • Link to the IANA status code registry

    From 1 comment
    • The source of truth for this is the HTTP Status Code Registry at IANA: http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes/ It would be really nice if this page could at least…
      mnot on HN
  • Show explanations inline instead of new pages

    From 1 comment
    • Beautiful! A suggestion, though: Use the whitespace to the right of the status codes to display their explanations, rather than linking to a new page; it would be easier to…
      fendrak on HN

Questions

  • Which 300 redirect explanations are unclear?

    From 1 comment
    • Which ones specifically? I had to keep the micro-explanations very short so they only give a very very basic over-view, but the full page explanations should be more than…
      citricsquid on HN

Alternatives named

  • httpstat.us

    From 1 comment
  • httpcats.herokuapp.com

    From 1 comment
    • I think I prefer the lolcat-compliant version: http://httpcats.herokuapp.com/303
      shabble on HN
  • httprage.com

    From 1 comment
    • Or the f7u12 version: http://www.httprage.com/
      matth on HN
  • W3C RFC 2616 section 10

    From 1 comment
    • What's wrong with the first Google's response for "HTTP status codes" (i.e. http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html)?
      piotrSikora on HN

Category, keywords, summaries and labels on this page were made by AI (Thread Reader v2) and not checked by hand. Each point links to the comments it came from.

Add a badge to your READMEShown on HackerShow
[![Shown on HackerShow](https://hackershow.org/badge.svg)](https://hackershow.org/show/3626481)