- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 12:23:32 -0700
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Aug 1, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Mark Baker wrote: > > What am I missing? What's the value in restricting the information > that a response message can communicate? What's wrong with just > treating a response which communicates the state of the resource > post-invocation, as a special case? It's a different model, that's all. I see PATCH as something that automated clients can use to control the state of server resources in a reasonably predictable manner, and signaled this by talking about caching and synching clients. Your model, if I may characterize it, is closer to having the server in control than the client. But you already have POST for server-controlled interactions leading the client to a new part of the application. There's nothing restricting a javascript/forms application, AJAX or otherwise, from using POST to send a delta -- you don't need a standards committee for that! Lisa
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 19:23:48 UTC