- From: Scott Lawrence <scott@skrb.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:15:57 -0500
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>, Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, CalDAV DevList <ietf-caldav@osafoundation.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 19:52 +0100, Julian Reschke wrote: > Scott Lawrence wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 17:36 +0100, Julian Reschke wrote: > > > >>So what do I do if a have a resource that accepts HTML form posts, > >>SOAP > >>requests and ADDMEMBER-like semantics on the same URL? > > > > > > Either: > > > > - Implement it very very carefully. > > Hm. What exactly does that mean? It means that that resource should have a well defined way of determining what it is being asked to do for any given request. Personally, I would choose the second alternative - use different URLs for those different purposes, but... > When POST is applied to that resource with a content type of > "application/soap+xml", is it supposed to store the attached entity as a > new resource (with content type "application/soap+xml", returning a > Location response header with the URL of the new resource), or should it > process it according to > <http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part2-20030624>? That W3C spec does not mandate that anything in particular be done with a request body with that mime type. It in no way requires that a request body with that mime type invoke a SOAP operation or prevents a given URL from treating that body as an object to be stored.
Received on Tuesday, 22 February 2005 22:15:59 UTC