W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > August 2001

Re: POST abuse?

From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:41:23 +0200 (MET DST)
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0108271638080.11855-100000@tarantula.inria.fr>
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Mark Nottingham wrote:

> > Note that, a POST reply can contain a Cache-Control header and then imply
> > a certain level of idempotence. The first POST will have a side-effect but
> > any subsequent POST with the same parameters won't. Of course you have the
> > possibility to cache the result as a bonus of this idempotence property.
>
> True. However, I don't know of any product that takes advantage of
> this, as it's considered impractical. (Curious - does Jigsaw?)

The caching module needs reworking, so I chose the lazy option of POST ->
not cacheable, however it is in the todo list, mainly for QA reason
because I don't know any POST reply using Cache-Control information (and
I don't know any use of 303 instead in HTTP test suites).

> > Usually jsp engines are single servlets, and the URI of the jsp is
> > passed as an argument to this servlet. You have then a 1-to-1 jsp-URI
> > mapping, same as what can be done for a SOAP engine to respect this.
>
> Yep. Or, just use query arguments.

Yes, but in that case you add a meaning to a particular URI, which is far
better than using query argument for a black box on one URI. More
REST-friendly :)

-- 
Yves Lafon - W3C
"Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras."
Received on Monday, 27 August 2001 10:41:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:03 GMT