W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2003

Re: Clarification sought re "whenToUseGet"

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 12:01:07 -0600
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1070647267.13847.20.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 21:55, Mark Baker wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have a question regarding the "whenToUseGet" finding[1].  The general
> position of the finding seems to be summed up in section 1.3, the "Quick
> Checklist";
> 
>   "Use GET if [...] The interaction is more like a question (i.e., it
>    is a safe operation such as a query, read operation, or lookup)."
> 
> However, in section 6, regarding Web services and WSDL, the following is
> found;
> 
>   "Section 3 WSDL 1.2 Bindings [WSDL] provides a binding to HTTP GET,
>    which makes it possible to respect the principle of using GET for
>    safe operations. However, to represent safety in a more
>    straightforward manner, it should be a property of operations
>    themselves, not just a feature of bindings."
> 
> These statements seem inconsistent to me.  The latter seems to be saying
> that it's ok to have a safe operation which isn't GET as long as it's
> marked as safe,

Sorry, that's not what I meant.

I agree clarification is in order; I have a relevant action
on issue 7.

I had hoped to make substantial progress this week, but
the time has come and gone, and I'm travelling to XML 2003
next week.

Please stay tuned and feel free to remind me/us if I/we
haven't followed up in a couple/three weeks.

>  while the former says that in general (modulo the
> described practical considerations), the only safe operation should be
> GET.
> 
> Could the TAG please clarify this?  Thanks!
> 
>  [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet.html
> 
> Mark.
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 5 December 2003 13:11:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:23 GMT