Re: Redirection of a POST as a GET

Adrien de Croy schrieb:
> ...
> Of course if there are significant implementations out there that do 
> rely on the written specified behaviour, then it's a different picture, 
> but are there any, or is this just a purely hypothetical situation?
 > ...

Be careful.

HTTP is not only about browsers:

1) WebDAV servers are known to use 302 on methods such as PROPFIND (for 
instance, Apache/moddav for PROPFIND on a collection URL with trailing 
slash missing), and expect clients to proceed with PROPFIND, not GET.

2) I'm pretty sure that APP clients are expected noz to follow a 302 
upon POST with GET.

The confusion seems to be caused by 302 being used for two separate 
things (moving a resource, and pointing to a retrievable result of a 
POST). Both deserve separate status codes, and have got them as 303 and 
307 since January 1997 (307) or even longer (303).

It seems to me that the right thing to do here is to clearly deprecate 
302 (describing both what it was supposed to do, and what it does in 
practice), and lobbying for proper use of 303 and 307 instead.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Thursday, 8 March 2007 09:07:10 UTC