Re: PUT and DELETE methods in form@method from Julian Reschke on 2011-03-30 (public-html-comments@w3.org from March 2011)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:39:13 +0200
To: Cameron Heavon-Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>
CC: "T.J. Crowder" <tj@crowdersoftware.com>, Dominik Tomaszuk <ddooss@wp.pl>, public-html-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <4D933281.1090202@gmx.de>

On 30.03.2011 15:20, Cameron Heavon-Jones wrote:
> why can't a 201 just include some body content like a 200? This would
> allow for any response status to include html content for rendering the
> response to the user. The response content may not be available through
> any other uri of method but it seems like thats the way it should work.
>
> cam

Well,

existing servers do not do this for PUT and DELETE, as existing clients 
do only care about the status.

So servers would need to special-case requests from HTML forms; not good.

BR, Julian

Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 13:39:54 UTC