- Jan 2022
-
flaviabastos.ca flaviabastos.ca
-
If the ticket is incorrect or damaged, you cannot even go through the airport security: when they check your ticket, it will be refused. You are Forbidden to enter the boarding area of the airport.
It depends what we mean by "incorrect"/damaged "credentials ("ticket")...
A. If they are invalid or incorrect in the sense that we can't authenticate them as anyone (as it sounds like you mean with "incorrect" or "damaged") (they're not a user in our database or the password doesn't match a user in our database), then you should actually use 401, meaning that the client can/should try (again) to authenticate with different credentials.
B. But if by "incorrect" you mean (as it sounds like you mean with "you cannot even go through the airport security: when they check your ticket, it will be refused") that the credentials were valid enough to authenticate you as someone (a user in our database), but that (known( user has insufficient credentials, then correct, it should be a 403 forbidden.
It's even easier to explain / think about if you just think of 401 as being used for any missing or failed authentication. See:
- https://hyp.is/3fuPiHooEeyZc5cn4Q1uXg/stackoverflow.com/questions/3297048/403-forbidden-vs-401-unauthorized-http-responses
- https://hyp.is/oxI0uHonEeyZYvdQFZIEUQ/stackoverflow.com/questions/3297048/403-forbidden-vs-401-unauthorized-http-responses
- https://hyp.is/pB2XuHomEeyax28Y6vxcOg/stackoverflow.com/questions/3297048/403-forbidden-vs-401-unauthorized-http-responses
-
-
stackoverflow.com stackoverflow.com
-
status code 401 has been removed from that RFC
Well, technically it is still mentioned,
- in an example
- with a reference to RFC7235
It just doesn't have a whole section about it in this RFC. But I think that's not because it's trying to say that it's no longer needed/useful, but rather because this new RFC has nothing to add about it /doesn't feel it necessary to clarify anything about 401s. That's why it simply links to the previous RFC for information about 401.
-
- Apr 2021
-
stackoverflow.com stackoverflow.com
-
Neither question nor answer appears to understand the notion of semantic HTML. Height and width are presentational attributes regardless of where you put them. For semantics we establish what the image means to content in the alt tag. I don't remember why it was so important to width/height in the HTML but I suspect it was in case you hit browsers without CSS rendering. It's not a semantics issue. If anything it thwarts separation of concerns to a degree.
claim: that the OP's question and this answer are incorrect
Could we say that this answer (that this comment replies to) missed the point?
I actually believed and thought this answer was spot on ... until I read this comment, and then I reversed my opinion.
-
-
boardgamegeek.com boardgamegeek.com
-
The reviewer made a mistake, either in actual play or just in writing the review.
-
- Dec 2020
-
github.com github.com
-
you cannot pass around components very flexibly, you cannot take a component as a parameter
Tags
Annotators
URL
-
- Oct 2020
-
www.wordhippo.com www.wordhippo.com
-
unnecessary evil
"unnecessary evil" is a synonym, not an antonym, for "unfortunate necessity".
-
- Mar 2020
-
www.quora.com www.quora.com
-
Well, the checkbox type has nothing to do with AI, but I’ve read that the type where you have to select “Which picture is …” does collect data to train AIs. It seems dear Dave is confusing between the 2 types.
-