W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: [p1-messaging] 2.7.1. http URI scheme - [ "?" query ]

From: Ray Polk <raypolk@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:50:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CABqtACaeiANHTDfEdeVO2cPakadO3E+kCOd9p3AHGB5X4uF=GQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Possibly irrelevant (does this group care about common practices by user
agents?) but....are there clients that have issues with passing query
params to non GET verbs?  If many/most do have such a limitation, I can see
how people might try to avoid using query on other verbs.

(Neophyte question:  Is discussion of this sort seen as polluting this
mailing list?  ...or is it cool?)

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 07:43:10PM +0100, Julian Reschke wrote:
> > On 2012-01-19 19:32, Ray Polk wrote:
> > >The spec doesn't seem to speak suggested/valid combinations of verbs and
> > >query parameters (please point me to the location if I've missed it).
> >
> > No, it does not.
> >
> > >I've seen efforts to constrain the use of query parameters to just GETs.
> > >  Others suggesting not to use query parameters for PUT/POST ("those
> > >values should be a part of the entity" I've read).  Is this merely a
> > >sort of grassroots best practice?
> > >
> > >Is such advice misguidance?
> > >
> > >If such guidance is good, is it appropriate for the spec to suggest it?
> >
> > I don't think it's good guidance.
>
> Agreed, and I've already seen some apps making use of POST requests on
> URLs containing a question mark without any issue. Most often it's just
> a matter of what framework is used on the app side to distinguish
> between args from the query string and args from the body.
>
> Regards,
> Willy
>
>
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2012 19:50:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:53 GMT