W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > April 2011

contenteditable and PUT - was Re: [Fwd: Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code]

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 17:22:16 +0100
Message-ID: <4D974D38.9010705@webr3.org>
CC: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Cameron Heavon-Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>, mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>, public-html@w3.org, public-html-comments@w3.org, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Nathan wrote:
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 02.04.2011 17:32, Cameron Heavon-Jones wrote:
>> That is true.
>>
>> What I want to avoid though is that a server can't support PUT for 
>> both forms and other kinds of clients on the same URI.
> 
> Likewise, I strongly feel that some common use cases for PUT would be say:
> 
> 1) coupling <form>, <input type="file"> and <progress> together in some 
> way to allow somebody to say PUT an image/jpeg (with the correct 
> Content-Type value)
> 
> 2) PUTting some text/* or application/* specified in a <textarea> to a 
> location, again with the correct Content-Type set.
> 
> If those are supported then all manner of clever domain specific server 
> side juggling of representations can be done for those that want to try 
> and juggle between application/x-form-urlencoded and say application/json.
> 
> I'd suggest that it would be easy to foresee a simple apache mod that 
> enabled simple PUTting and DELETEing on resources, storing the 
> representations as received, and that any efforts to support either PUT 
> or DELETE should be focussed towards something people can actually use, 
> out of the box, without any complex code implementation or domain 
> specific understanding of experimental media types like 
> application/x-form-urlencoded or POST centric ones like 
> multipart/form-data.

Actually to be brutally honest, I'd personally find a coupling of 
contenteditable with in browser PUT/DELETE buttons far more useful (so 
one could edit an HTML document in browser then PUT it back), as would 
most of my clients. Especially if it were also enabled for text/ types too.

Best,

Nathan
Received on Saturday, 2 April 2011 16:23:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:35 GMT