3 ms·
> "application level errors are communicated via a 200, properly" Wiki: 2xx Success This class of status codes indicates the action requested by the cli
by strictnein 10y ago
> "application level errors are communicated via a 200, properly"
Wiki:
2xx Success
This class of status codes indicates the action requested by the client was received,
understood, accepted, and processed successfully
RFC 2616:
10.2.1 200 OK
The request has succeeded
Not really "proper" to use it that way, but if it works for you and your users I guess go for it. Also, I highly disagree with the rest of it (cleaner code, better interoperability, simpler debugging), but those are matters of opinion so there's no point in arguing them.
- jack9 9y ago> client was received, understood, accepted, and processed successfully How is this not processed successfully? The request was processed successfully by the webserver ... and the error was handled by the application, so you can reliably say it was processed successfully at that level, down to the CPU. Narrow interpretation to fit a narrative has no technical merit. That being said, standards are set with certain models in mind and are imperfect almost uniformly, so I don't put too much stock in adherence to what someone imagined or put through committee at some point. I do try to find the best way to iterate reliably with least astonishing abstractions and predictable interfaces. I reason about it in the terms of the standard and it serves my teams.