- From: Cameron Heavon-Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 17:25:40 +0100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>, public-html@w3.org
On 04/04/2011, at 5:17 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 04.04.2011 18:08, Cameron Heavon-Jones wrote: >> Since PUT and DELETE responses are non-cachable, the default behaviour to avoid protocol inefficiencies should be to return no content - unless the client has specifically requested content. >> >> A html representation is a valid response body for PUT and DELETE, especially if it was the format of request generation as is the case from forms. It need not be a full representation of the resource, which would be overkill for an operation over that representation, but should be a formatted response to the request - WebDAV has chosen plain text to represent this. > > ...WebDAV (the spec) hasn't chosen any specific format. > > The tricky question is: how does the server know that a PUT was the result of a form submission? > > Checking the content type appears to be fragile; in particular if later on we want to extend the set of types. > >> ... > > BR, Julian But why does the server need to know the request was as result of a form submission? The server requires to know the content-type of the request - this would be one of the form encTypes. The server requires to know the content-type of the response - this would be the Accept header as specified by UA. cam
Received on Monday, 4 April 2011 16:26:16 UTC