W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2005

[whatwg] Web Forms 2.0

From: Joe Gregorio <joe.gregorio@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 21:21:12 -0400
Message-ID: <3f1451f505040518216a5702c3@mail.gmail.com>
On Apr 5, 2005 8:36 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Joe Gregorio wrote:
> > > >
> > > >     "If the specified method is not one of get, post,
> > > >      put, or delete then it is treated as *post* in the tables
> > > >      below."
> > >
> > > I agree. Sadly, doing this would break compatibility with existing
> > > implementations, which all treat unknown values as "get".
> >
> > Would that really 'break' anything? If that is the default behaviour
> > today then clients would expect not to be able to send a request body
> > with a method outside POST and PUT. Adding that capability won't break
> > their code, will it?
> 
> If anyone has a form that says:
> 
>    <form method="ge">
> 
> ...then at the moment it'll be treated as GET. If you change the default
> to "post", it'll no longer be treated as GET.

I knew there must be a case that I was over-looking. That makes sense.
 
> I really don't feel comfortable changing things that all browsers do. If
> all the browsers interoperate on something, we should celebrate that thing
> and leave it well alone... It's so rare...

I can't argue with that :)

    Thanks,
    -joe

-- 
Joe Gregorio        http://bitworking.org
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2005 18:21:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:22 UTC