W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2002

Re: Entities

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:00:15 -0700
Cc: "'Jeffrey Mogul'" <Jeff.Mogul@hp.com>, "'Alex Rousskov'" <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, "'Kim Horne'" <kim@pookzilla.com>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
To: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org>
Message-Id: <356001C8-B488-11D6-868F-000393753936@apache.org>

On Monday, August 19, 2002, at 09:43  PM, Larry Masinter wrote:
> Roy, you're mixing server and client responsibilities. It's
> quite possible to mandate "must not send a body with GET" for
> clients and also mandate "must parse and ignore message bodies
> with GET" for servers.

Just the opposite. I was stating the requirement as it is currently
written -- separating server and client responsibilities.  The message
parsing algorithm does not know about method semantics aside from
HEAD responses.  Whether or not a body is included with GET is not
determined by the method semantics -- a server that does not anticipate
and correctly parse a GET request with a body is not compliant with
the protocol.

Adding yet another requirement to HTTP just to say that a
client MUST NOT send a body with GET, HEAD, DELETE, etc., will not
change the interoperability of the current protocol and it absolutely
must not change the message parsing algorithm (the example that Jeff
was talking about).  Doing so only eliminates the possibility that
future extensions might use the request body for those methods.

....Roy
Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2002 18:00:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:49:19 GMT