tis 2007-01-16 klockan 10:16 +1100 skrev Mark Nottingham: > However, I think casual readers -- and some implementers -- have been > tripped up because many method definitions are silent on the matter, > and don't *explicitly* allow sending an entity-body. It might be > clarified by changing "does not allow" to "explicitly disallows". Agreed. It's after all what is meant. > Also, devil's advocate; > 1) What are the implications of an entity-body on GET for the caching > model? The spec is silent on this AFAICT. There is none. Implied from 4.3 A server SHOULD read and forward a message-body on any request; if the request method does not include defined semantics for an entity-body, then the message-body SHOULD be ignored when handling the request. > 2) Ditto for content negotiation. See above. But Vary covers it via the * should such uses arise. > 3) Are there any existent origin server or intermediary > implementations that are fully conformant with this requirement? Apache (by default), Squid (if enabled). Quite likely many others. Regards HenrikReceived on Tuesday, 16 January 2007 00:18:41 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 4 October 2011 12:13:57 GMT