W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: Multi-server HTTP

From: Nicolas Alvarez <nicolas.alvarez@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 00:49:48 -0300
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <h7i5ks$5to$1@ger.gmane.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote:
> That's a good start, but it deserves a bit of discussion.
> 
> "byte-for-byte" implies that the bodes are the same, but what about
> things like:
> 
> * Entity headers (e.g., Content-Type)
> * Available content-encodings
> * Whether partial content is supported
> * Whether the same set of methods are supported (e.g., if A is a
> duplicate of B, will POSTing something to either have the same effect
> as on the other?)
> 
> I think the answer is that entity headers should generally be the
> same, so the real question is whether we're talking about the relation
> describing:
> 
> a) resources with duplicate representations (i.e., a GET on any of the
> dups will return the same reps)
> b) duplicate resources (i.e., any method will have the same effect)
> 
> If it's (b), we should consider whether the resources are in fact the
> same "behind the curtains" (e.g., POSTing to A has the exact same
> effect on the world as POSTing to B), or whether they may be in fact
> separate systems (i.e., A and B have the same "interface", but POSTing
> to A may affect a different part of the world to B).

Well, we're talking about static GETable resources with a single
representation. But I agree that if you make a Link relation, you'd want it
to be applicable to as many HTTP resources as possible... Or is it
possible / reasonable to say "this relation doesn't make sense for dynamic
or POSTable resources and shouldn't be used for those"?
Received on Tuesday, 1 September 2009 03:50:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:10 GMT