W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > June 2006

Re: Extension HTTP methods

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:28:29 +0200
Message-ID: <448ABAED.5040805@gmx.de>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
CC: public-webapi@w3.org

Bjoern Hoehrmann schrieb:
> * Julian Reschke wrote:
>> I don't understand this statement, because I'm not sure why XHR would 
>> care at all what the verb is. HTTP fully defines how message 
>> transmission works independently of the verb (with the single notable 
>> exception being the responses to HEAD).
> 
> That depends on how much magic you add, like automatically following
> redirects or automatically responding to authentication challenges.

I see.

Automatically following redirects requires the XHR implementation to 
know that the method is safe (that can be done only using a white list). 
BTW: following redirects can be tricky if the method has a request body, 
it requires that the XHR implementation keeps a copy of it for 
re-transmission (MSXML gets this wrong).

I'm not sure about authentication challenges? Where's the dependency on 
the actual method?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Saturday, 10 June 2006 12:28:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:55 GMT