W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2011

Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code

From: Cameron Heavon-Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 17:25:40 +0100
Cc: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>, public-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <48610C27-3E10-4D12-B457-4D80FF2DCF74@gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:24 UTC