W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 1997

RE: Distributed Authoring Proposals

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 11:42:51 -0800
Message-ID: <11352BDEEB92CF119F3F00805F14F485026B72D6@RED-44-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>
To: "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Could you please expand on the point of how the semantics are different?
In writing my proposals I constantly was testing out the use of PUT with
a body and PUT with a Source header and I never found myself forced to
change anything based solely on that difference. Of course, that is just
a limited test case. I would appreciate your insight in the matter.
	Thanks,
		Yaron

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Roy T. Fielding [SMTP:fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU]
> Sent:	Tuesday, March 25, 1997 11:29 AM
> To:	Yaron Goland
> Cc:	w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> Subject:	Re: Distributed Authoring Proposals 
> 
> >But how do you feel about PUT w/the Source header? That solves the
> >message/external-body problem.
> 
> Asking the server to do a retrieval to obtain the content of a
> resource
> to be replaced is fundamentally different from asking a server to
> replace
> a resource with the supplied content.  That is why the first is a COPY
> and
> the second is a PUT.  The server-side implementation may be similar,
> but
> the request semantics are not.
> 
> ....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 1997 15:17:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:42 GMT