W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1996

Re: Section 9.4 POST

From: <jg@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 31 May 96 20:57:27 -0400
Message-Id: <9606010057.AA06037@zorch.w3.org>
To: Paul Leach <paulle@microsoft.com>
Cc: "'http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com'" <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/668
Paul Leach <paulle@microsoft.com> says:
> Section 9.6 says:
>If a resource has been created on the origin server, the response SHOULD
>be 201 (Created) and contain an entity which describes the status of the
>request and refers to the new resource.
>Should it says that it SHOULD also return a Content-Location: when a
>resource has been created? Or at least refer to the Content-Location
>section to indicate the possible desirability of same?

My intuition says it doesn't buy much; here's why:

Post might create arbitrary resources, not just one.  Trying to shoehorn
that through Content-Location would be a problem; but Post says you
"SHOULD be 201 (Created) and contain an entity which describes the
status of the request to the new resource."  This allows Post to
perform arbitrary operations, while returning arbitrary guidance to
the end user that might list the 342 resources created....

I suppose one could ask servers to return a list of Content-Locations
listing the created resources, but does this accompish anything?  What
would you use the information for?

Maybe others have opinions; this is the end of my thoughts on the topic.
			- Jim
Received on Friday, 31 May 1996 18:00:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:17 UTC