W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 1996

Re: HTTP working group status & issues (please reply)

From: Maurizio Codogno <mau@beatles.cselt.stet.it>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 13:10:44 +0200
Message-Id: <199609271110.NAA12613@beatles.cselt.stet.it>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: masinter@parc.xerox.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1654

% - GET-with-body or idempotent-POST
%   Discussed on the working group; there seems to be enough
%   demand, but not a lot of clarity on the solution.
%   *** I'd like a brief note from you about your opinion,
%       especially if you haven't responded on this before.

I personally don't like very much an idempotent-POST: if I have an
incremental database, POSTing twice should result in two record added.
Netscape "repost form data?" checkbox is however a good idea, IMO, and
maybe it could be further developed to content everybody.

% - versioning & distributed authoring
%   The versioning/distributed authoring group(s) are making
%   good progress on requirements and proposals.
%   *** Opinions about 'same group' vs 'separate group'?

Don't care. I feel that versioning can bear the complexity which
distributed authoring adds.

% *** Is this schedule OK with you? 
Yes .

ciao, .mau.
Received on Friday, 27 September 1996 04:15:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:16:20 UTC