W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2007

RE: PATCH Draft

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 16:22:54 -0700
To: "'Henrik Nordstrom'" <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>, "'James M Snell'" <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "'Lisa Dusseault'" <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Message-ID: <004401c7b77f$c1cc26a0$456473e0$@org>

# Why is Accept-Patch required. Or what is it that makes Accept unsuitable here?

Accept is currently a request header and not a response header.
What's acceptable depends on the method as well as the URI.

For example

(request)
OPTIONS /example/buddies.xml HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.com

(response)
Allow: GET, PUT, POST, PATCH, OPTIONS
Accept-PATCH: application/diff, application/diff+xml
Accept-PUT: application/xml
Accept-POST: application/vcard

Accept-POST might be useful for forms submission URIs, to 
determine whether multipart/form-data, URL encoded, or other
submission formats might be acceptable.
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 23:23:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:10 GMT