Re: Issue i17 (Revise description of the POST method)

Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> Again, I don't quite get what it is you are worried about here. The
> "data-accepting process" is just about anything which accepts data and
> processes it in some manner..
> 
> What about the text is it you have concerns with?

Seems I have trouble getting my concerns across :-).

This is related to a discussion we had a few weeks ago over on Atompub, 
where there was an argument whether a server can just drop parts of the 
PUT body, or actually implement PUT as some kind of PATCH (where PUT 
would only modify parts of the existing resource).

I *think* the consensus was that when RFC2616 says "store" it really 
means "store", so -- in general a server should not just do a partial 
update of the request being identified.

rfc2616bis-02 relaxes the original definition of POST, so my concern is 
that by PUT referencing POST we also have relaxed the definition of PUT 
as well (making it: the server may do *anything* it wants).

Best regards, Julian