W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: PUT: store "under" vs. "at", was: [ietf-http-wg] <none>

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:17:23 +1000
Cc: Robert Brewer <fumanchu@aminus.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <DE392C83-2E01-495F-988B-72CB9538734F@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

I think this is editorial; Julian, can you create?


On 09/04/2008, at 11:52 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

>
> Robert Brewer wrote:
>> http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/browser/draft-ietf-httpbis/02
>> /draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-02.txt says:
>>    8.6.  PUT
>>    The PUT method requests that the enclosed entity be stored under  
>> the
>>    supplied Request-URI.
>> RFC2616 says the same. I've run into several people now who thought
>> "under" implied "at a subpath of the Request-URI" (yes, even though  
>> the
>> following text clearly contradicts that). To reduce confusion, can we
>> change "under" to "at"?
>
> Sounds good to me.
>
> BR, Julian
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2008 23:18:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:47 GMT