Re: server applying PUT to a resource other than the request-URI

Yves Lafon (as “Yves”) wrote in

> When you know that /new.txt will generate new URIs, the correct method 
> to trigger [it] is POST and clearly not PUT.
> What's wrong with [the following scenario?]
> POST /give_me_a_new_URI
> => 303 See Other
>    Location: /new1.txt
> => PUT /new1.txt
> ...

In HTTP, a response whose status code is “303” fails to direct the user 
agent to issue a request whose method is “PUT”. RFC 2616 recommends that 
the user agent issue a request whose method is “GET” and whose 
Request-URI is the URI that appeared in the “Location” header field of 
the preceding response (see, for example, 
<>). The latest 
(as of 2008-10-24) working draft of a revision to that part of RFC 2616 
allows, but does not mandate, a request whose method is “GET” (see, for 

Specifications aside, user agents in the field will react to a status 
code of “303” with a request whose method is “GET”. Many operators of 
origin servers rely on such behavior, as do the people who direct their 
user agents to those origin servers.

Please do not include my address in public replies. I will read public 
replies on the list.

Received on Friday, 24 October 2008 11:13:20 UTC