On Tue, 2002-07-09 at 14:33, Mike Dierken wrote: > > > I disagree about URIs implying a pull model and synchronous > > > interactions. The mailto:mike@dataconcert.com URI isn't pull and it > > > isn't synchronous. > > > > Hmm. Yes. I'm wrong. But that's an awfully interesting URI. > > > > It isn't GETtable. It's non-idempotent. > > GET mailto:mike@dataconcert.com HTTP/1.1 > Host: magic.httpserver.net > User-Agent: not-your-fathers-browser > Authentication: BASIC YA4H8G== > Accept: text/xml; message/rfc822; text/plain Sorry to be stupid, but does this do anything useful? By its nature, as far as I can parse it, a mailto URL is going to indicate a state-changing, non-idempotent action, and thus isn't appropriate for a GET. For that matter, I don't quite understand how one would 'get' a mailto .... But you've produced an example, what does it mean? Amy! -- Amelia A. Lewis Architect, TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc. alewis@tibco.comReceived on Tuesday, 9 July 2002 14:38:37 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:10 GMT