Re: NEW ISSUE: Content-Location vs PUT/POST

On tis, 2007-07-31 at 18:17 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:

> 1) It seems that the meaning of Content-Location is universal for 
> messages that carry an entity; I'm not sure what's the point in claiming 
> that meaning does not apply to PUT or POST.

Not sure.

Personally I would rather see PUT be allowed to reject messages with an
mismatch in Content-Location. The result of such operation is not likely
to be what was intended..

> 2) Also: every time a limited set of methods is mentioned somewhere it 
> feels like problematic spec writing. What makes PUT or POST so special 
> in comparison to other methods? Maybe that they are the only methods in 
> RFC2616 that carry request entity bodies? In which case the statement 
> should be rephrased accordingly...

Probably.

Suggestion:

Drop "PUT or POST " from that sentence, making it apply in general to
any kind of request. Which I guess is also what all servers do...


Regards
Henrik