W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > January to March 2001

RE: Autoversion confusion

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:44:24 -0500
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B101FC034A@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
I agree with Tim and John.  Although the HTTP/1.1 spec 
doesn't make GET/PUT behavior as explicit as we might want,
I don't believe there is any confusion in the community
as to the behavior of GET/PUT on an ordinary resource.
I believe any attempt by us to define the core semantics
of GET/PUT would lead folks to believe we are trying to
*change* the definition of GET/PUT, which is very much not
what we want to do. 

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com [mailto:Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 4:58 AM
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: RE: Autoversion confusion




John wrote:
> This shouldn't be necessary, since the HTTP spec
> defines the behavior of GET and PUT. Specifically,
> it says that PUT to a particular resource defines
> the response for any following GET on that same
> resource (I'm paraphrasing from memory). There
> can't be any other possible interpretation (that
> doesn't break HTTP semantics).

I agree with John.

At the risk of nagging<g>, a version-controlled resource is an honest to
goodness WebDAV resource, with content and properties (version-controlled
collections have members and properties).  Intuatively, if a PUT to the
resource succeeds (200 OK) then a client is entitled to believe they will
GET the same entity back.

p.s.
I had a quick look through the HTTP/1.1 spec, and didn't see anything that
states this categorically.  In fact, Section 9.6 (PUT) states:
 "HTTP/1.1 does not define how a PUT method affects the state of an origin
server."
Now, how many clients do a GET just to check what they actually will
retrieve after a successful PUT!

Tim
Received on Friday, 9 February 2001 07:36:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:40 GMT