Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still love that people actually went through the effort to "implement" it.
Any links to APIs that implement a 418 HTTP response code?
Http.cat implements it: https://http.cat/418
HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
101–110 of 114 posts
Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alternatively there actually is a HTTP PATCH verb that you can use for this - I think that tolerating is more appropriate for common misspellinks - i.e. accepting a request like an HTTP POST {"days": 12, "horus": 13 "minutes": 27}
But what happens when the API is updated to support Egyptian gods as keys?
You submit a scarab report.
Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#103It's quaint, it's a joke about IoT devices before they were everywhere. I'm currently disappointed that the office has "upgraded" coffee machines and the new one has a permanent internet connection and shows ads/branding (for coffee) when it is idle.
So, if the server were a real "smart" IoT teapot, such response become actually valid? :)
One day in the future, people will be amazed out how forward thinking our society was circa 1999 when they planned status codes for IoT devices that wouldn't be invented for another 20 years. "Oh if only society now could be as wise forward thinking as people were back then. Planting seeds in gardens they'd never get to see."
Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#104Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get those every so often from US websites that doesn't want to deal with the GDPR.
That suggests that there are websites anywhere that do want to deal with GDPR, which seems rather unlikely.
Of course there's a lot of people who would prefer to ignore laws. That doesn't make GDPR an especially bad one.
Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#106I'm personally of the opinion that 418 shouldn't be considered a joke response, but would actually useful as 418 "Unsupported Device". What response should a printer give if you asked it to send a fax, but you have a base-model printer that doesn't support sending faxes. From the perspective of the printer, I know what you want (i.e. not a 404) and you've asked for it correctly (i.e. not 400 or 401 or 403), but I can…
It's complete overlap with 404 IMO
[deleted]
Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#107For those who may not know, this comes from RFC 2324: ""Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol (HTCPCP/1.0) , The RFC was published 1 April 1998 (April Fool's Day). There's a long history of humorous RFCs published on 1 April. For example, RFC 1149 "IP over Avian Carriers" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_over_Avian_Carriers List of Additional April Fool's RFCs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools%27_Day_Request…
I'm shocked nobody's posted it yet, but iiNet (Australian ISP)'s coffee cam[0] is 13+ years running now:
Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#108Google's 418 error page: https://www.google.com/teapot
Fun fact: if you're on mobile the site will use your accelerometer to let you pour water out of the teapot!
Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
To toot my own horn, I did an April Fool’s status code RFC: 397 Tolerating, for when a client sends a flawed request, but you’re going to tolerate it because you know what they really meant: https://pastebin.com/TPj9RwuZ
Is this basically "I'm doing the robustness principle but also communicating that I'm judging you"?
I love the concept.
At the firm I work at, one of my "10% time" projects was to build out a "warnings" field in the API response. There are often times that you want to say "this is not inherently wrong, but likely represents wrong assumptions upstream" or "you're asking for something that's obsolete and is now being silently ignored".
For example, if someone passes a currency field with the wrong number of decimal places. You might actually want to say your product costs $1.62346, but it's more likely you're not sanitizing your data and relying on non-guaranteed rounding behaviour to make it right.
The problem we have is that the most of the API fields are opt-in-- the people who could most use the warnings are unlikely to go in and activate them.
Re: HTTP Status 418 – I'm a teapot
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this basically "I'm doing the robustness principle but also communicating that I'm judging you"?
I love the concept. At the firm I work at, one of my "10% time" projects was to build out a "warnings" field in the API response. There are often times that you want to say "this is not inherently wrong, but likely represents wrong assumptions upstream" or "you're asking for something that's obsolete and is now being silently ignored". For example, if someone passes a currency field with the wrong number of decimal p…
To be honest I think the robustness principle isn’t very well supported. We shouldn’t be this accommodating in what we accept. We’re very likely harming users by ignoring errors.