W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2007

Re: CR123: Simultaneous presence of {http method} and {safe}

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:33:01 +0100
To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
Cc: WSD Public <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-id: <45D0A4CD.6030408@crf.canon.fr>

Fair enough.

You've won this week's prize of affection from the editors. :-)

JJ.

Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> Jean-Jacques, 
> as Jonathan has already mentioned, I believe, one can have a safe
> operation that uses POST. 
>
> Safety is used for defaulting to GET so that you can have interfaceless
> bindings that nevertheless use GET for some operations. Such defaulting
> may even be incorrect in light of how much request data can be
> represented usefully and interoperably in a URI. There are practical
> limits to that.
>
> I don't think it's useful to tie {http method} and {safe} more than they
> are tied now.
> Best regards,
> Jacek
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 14:51 +0100, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
>   
>> I've implemented the current resolution for CR123.
>>
>> However, I think we need to do a little more. Indeed, currently:
>> - if both {http method} (or, in its absence, {http method default}) and 
>> {safe} are set, {http method} takes precendence, i.e. the value of the 
>> {safe} property is ignored.
>>
>> This could be an issue, for example if {http method}="POST" and 
>> {safe}="true".
>>
>> Two alternatives:
>> a. Indicate {http method} and {safe} cannot be present simultaneously.
>>
>> b. {safe} takes precendence over {http method} (as {http method} already 
>> takes precendence over {http method default}).
>>
>> There's some appealing symmetry in b., but a. may be straigther.
>>
>> JJ.
>>
>>     
>
>
>   
Received on Monday, 12 February 2007 17:33:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:46 GMT