W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1995

Re: Comments on draft-v10-03a.

From: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 11:21:19 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199508301621.LAA19056@hopf.math.nwu.edu>
To: Paul Hoffman <ietf-lists@proper.com>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
According to Paul Hoffman:
> >Idempotent
> I second the request for a clear definition in the context of this spec.
> Another good reason for this: idempotent is not in any dictionary
> (including my Webster's unabridged) that I could find.

As a professor of mathematics I will be happy to supply a formal
definition on request.  However, I would say that based on the
mathematical meaning I had always assumed that an idempotent request
is one which results in identical responses if it is sent multiple
times.  Obviously in this sense "GET" is not an idempotent method.

In any case, we have ample evidence that this term is causing confusion
and needs to be replaced or carefully defined.

John Franks
Received on Wednesday, 30 August 1995 09:23:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:14 UTC