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

Re: REPOST (was: HTTP working group status & issues)

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 17:45:03 -0700
To: Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <9610011745.aa12896@paris.ics.uci.edu>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1677
> 	Just to elaborate on that, as already stated in the HTTP/1.1 draft,
> only the server (actually, in the case of FORMs with METHOD=POST, its CGI
> script) can determine if a POST is idempotent, based on how the content
> entity in the request is handled by the server/script.  Therefore, it is
> important (IMHO) that the HTTP protocol provide for an Idempotent reply
> header by which the client can be informed if the POST was idempotent
> ("yes"), with the default remaining "no".

You are talking about establishing a relationship between the content
of the current response and a resource (identified by a URL) which
corresponds to the meaning of the original POST request, such that the
original request can be repeated in a safe manner.  Use

   Link: <http://site/that_resource>; rel=source

for supplying such a relationship.

 ...Roy T. Fielding
    Department of Information & Computer Science    (fielding@ics.uci.edu)
    University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-3425    fax:+1(714)824-4056
Received on Tuesday, 1 October 1996 18:40:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:00 UTC