Re: [Ietf-caldav] [Fwd: draft-reschke-http-addmember-00]

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> 
> On Feb 22, 2005, at 5:37 AM, Mark Baker wrote:
> 
>> Ah, so you're saying that ADDMEMBER isn't uniform?
> 
> 
> Actually, no, I was saying that ADDMEMBER as currently defined
> is identical to POST.  Julian said that it wasn't identical because
> his client would be able to expect one semantic, namely that a
> 201 result would cause the webdav collection to contain a new
> member with the given media type.  That implies an additional
> requirement that the target be a webdav collection, which isn't
> uniform at all.

I'm not sure how you get to that conclusion. ADDMEMBER (as proposed) 
doesn't require the target resouce to be a WebDAV collection.

> ...

Best regards, Julian

-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760