W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re: WiSH: A General Purpose Message Framing over Byte-Stream Oriented Wire Protocols (HTTP)

From: Loïc Hoguin <essen@ninenines.eu>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 11:29:34 +0300
To: Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com>
Cc: Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <97fa3a7c-473a-6014-732e-ef0879f5eb82@ninenines.eu>
On 10/28/2016 04:04 AM, Wenbo Zhu wrote:
>     * The HEAD method behaves as usual. The PUT method is probably not
>     compatible with doing this. PATCH and DELETE are not compatible AFAIK.
> Not sure why a PUT/PATCH request can't have a streamed body.  I don't
> think we want to over-spec how to use HTTP with this media type (which
> is not the only stream-able media type either)

PUT can definitely have a streamed body, but protocols are a little more 
than that. PUT creates or replaces the resource with the enclosed 
representation, so whether PUT can be used depends on the protocol. If 
webstream is used like an event stream then there's definitely no 
problem; if it's used for MQTT the PUT semantics are lost.

PATCH expects a media type containing instructions on how to modify the 
resource, so again it depends on the protocol.

We should definitely not restrict it to specific methods, and that's not 
what I was trying to say. I was just trying to point out which methods 
should be mentioned in the document, even if only in an informative way 
or in examples.

A more general paragraph about request methods forbidding bodies should 
be more than enough to cover everything without going too much into the 
details of each method.


Loïc Hoguin
Received on Friday, 28 October 2016 08:30:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 28 October 2016 08:30:13 UTC