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

Re: New issue: Need for an HTTP request method registry

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 00:33:19 +0200
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1186439599.13317.89.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
On tis, 2007-08-07 at 10:17 +1200, Adrien de Croy wrote:

> However I would strongly caution against the proliferation of methods.


The issue is that today there already is a lot of methods, and not easy
to keep track of which method is defined in which RFC.

> since I write a proxy, I'm biased towards proxies, but every time a 
> method is added to HTTP, we eventually get requests to support it.

Same here. But at the same time HTTP is written with method
extensibility from start so I don't consider it an excuse..

> A layered approach might be a better solution to implementing new 
> higher-level applications.  One that doesn't invalidate deployed 
> servers, gateways etc.

Sure, but most HTTP extensions is not really higher level. More refining
the protocol to fit the requirements better.

But extreme care needs to be taken when inventing new methods, to not
fall into the same pitfall as for example WebDAV PROPFIND has done...


Received on Monday, 6 August 2007 22:33:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:43 UTC