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

Re: i19 Bodies on GET (and other) requests

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 08:15:33 -0500
Message-ID: <c70bc85d0701150515rb71307an89f2acea7cabb2ac@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

My take would be to not say anything about this because, as Roy has
pointed out before (e.g. [1]), HTTP 1.1 request messages are
self-descriptive about the presence or absence of a body independent
of the method.

 [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2002JulSep/0031.html

Mark.

On 1/15/07, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>
> Background at: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/
> 2006AprJun/0103>
>
> Does anybody have any new information / thoughts about this?
>
> My personal take: it seems like the most expedient thing to do would
> be to go through each method defined by 2616 and explicitly state
> whether it allows a body or not, so as to remove the ambiguity. Also,
> it would be good to recommend that new method definitions (perhaps in
> an IANA registry?) also include this information.
>
> Straw-man list:
> GET - no
> PUT - yes
> DELETE - no
> POST - yes
> TRACE - yes
> OPTIONS - yes
> CONNECT - n/a
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>


-- 
Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.         http://www.markbaker.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com
Received on Monday, 15 January 2007 13:15:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:00 GMT