- From: Mike Champion <mc@xegesis.org>
- Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 16:24:03 -0500
- To: www-ws@w3.org
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 14:00:22 -0500, Mark Baker <mbaker@idokorro.com> wrote: > > The choice to use GET vs POST to retrieve stuff is most > definitely an architectural decision, because the properties of > the architecture depend on that choice. If you choose to use GET > to retrieve data, your system demonstrates greater visibility than > if you were to use POST. That's why the TAG says stuff like; > > "Safe operations (read, query, view, ask, lookup, etc.) on HTTP > resources SHOULD be implemented using GET" > -- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/get7 > > Now *that's* architectural guidance! 8-) Well, I think it's best practice guidance. (note the SHOULD as opposed to MUST). I agree that SOAP 1.2 is better off having a mechanism so as to give the binding a hint that if the operation requested is "safe" so that the appropriate message transport mechanism-level operation is requested. I guess we will continue to disagree because you see these as fundamental architectural principles, and I see them as implementation optimizations and best practice guidelines. Maybe that makes me a Reformed RESTifarian, and you and Orthodox RESTifarian :-) [See http://www.rdfrost.com/Reference/Religion/Heretic_Scum.html -- maybe I'm a Reformed RESTifarian Reformation of SOAP 1.2 and you're a Reformed RESTifarian Reformation of Fielding's Thesis :-) :-) ]
Received on Friday, 4 April 2003 16:25:50 UTC