- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 20:10:21 -0700
- To: Jeffrey Mogul <Jeff.Mogul@hp.com>
- Cc: HTTP working group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Does the below imply that this proposal would effectively become "how to use delta encoding in PUT requests," with PATCH being a means to assure that it won't be misinterpreted as a plain PUT by non-PATCH aware implementations? If so, there's a quite prescient note in RFC3229: > Nothing in this specification specifically precludes the use of > a delta encoding for the body of a PUT request. However, no > mechanism currently exists for the client to discover if the > server can interpret such messages, and so we do not attempt > to > specify how they might be used. On Apr 30, 2004, at 3:23 PM, Jeffrey Mogul wrote: > Modelling on the RFC3229 approach, PATCH could look like > this instead: > > PATCH /file.txt HTTP/1.1 > Host: foo > If-Match: "def" > Content-encoding: gzip > IM: vcdiff > > [body] > > Seems reasonable to me :-) > > -Jeff > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 2 May 2004 23:10:22 UTC