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

RE: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:01:04 +0100
To: "Miles Sabin" <miles@milessabin.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCMEFBGHAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> Miles Sabin
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 3:46 PM
> To: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation)
>
>
>
> Julian Reschke wrote,
> > Miles Sabin wrote,
> > > That's consistent with the Servlet _API_ ... but you've no
> > > guarantee that any particular Servlet implementation will support
> > > arbitrary extension methods.
> >
> > OK. You can do it with any servlet implementation that conforms to
> > the servlet specification.
>
> You've misread the Servlet spec. It _allows_ Servlet implementations to
> support arbitrary extension HTTP methods, but it doesn't _require_ them
> to provide support.

The HttpServletRequest object has "getMethod()", wich "returns the method
with which the request was made". I can't see how this is optional. Could
you explain that?

Anyway, Tomcat (the reference impl) and all other servlet engines I've
tested actually behave this way.

> > > Like I said, how is the implementation supposed to know that the
> > > semantics of MGET are like GET rather than M-GET or CONNECT?
> >
> > It's not supposed to know. The whole point is that the servlet spec
> > allows you to implement *any* method.
>
> Yup ... _allows_.

Yes, it allows. The servlet API gives you all the control you need (by
implementing the "service(request, response)" method).

Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2003 10:01:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:16 GMT