On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 09:43, Dan Connolly wrote: > On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 13:45, David Orchard wrote: > > Does this suggest that there should be > > a general property of operations that specifies safetey, which could then be > > bound to POST? > > Marking HTTP POST operations safe is different from what I had in mind. > I don't see anything wrong with it, but I don't see very much benefit > from it either, compared to the benefit of making the results > of safe operations addressable. I am trying to understand what it means to make a POST operation safe. Does this mean designing a new method that carries a message body but is identified as a safe method (QUERY?) or does this mean something different? _ Ian > -- > Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs > Tel: +1 718 260-9447Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2003 09:55:47 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:55:49 GMT