- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 00:34:32 -0500
- To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: "HTML WG List" <public-html@w3.org>
On 11/7/07, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > Mark Baker wrote: > > As I see it, the message is "turn this URI into some data please", > > which is safe and idempotent (by definition: all safe messages are > > idempotent). > > Ian replied to this with pretty much exactly what I had been going to say. I > just want to reiterate that the idea of "ping" is to track what the user > selects. Each time the user selects something, it's a new event that needs to > be recorded. I understand, and that's fine. > Hence it's non-idempotent. No. The implementation is non-idempotent, the message is not. Consider that when my Web server receives GET requests, it logs (appends) a record of that in a log file. Does that make the message non-idempotent and non-safe? No, of course not, because GET messages are safe by *definition*. It does make the implementation both those things though. Until this distinction is appreciated, I don't think we're going to find any further common ground. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com
Received on Thursday, 8 November 2007 05:34:42 UTC