Re: Restoring PUT and DELETE

Cameron:

once you complete the changes, send me a link and i'll replace that local
file i am using now to your  link. that way any future changes will be
automatically reflected from my page.

mca
http://amundsen.com/blog/
http://twitter.com@mamund
http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me




On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 08:53, Cameron Heavon-Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>wrote:

>
> On 01/12/2011, at 9:03 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> > Ah, OK, missed that. Thanks. Still would be nice to have more details.
>
> i performed the tests manually using a html form which captured a status
> code to return and whether to include a payload or not. this was sent to a
> simple web server with POST and the server setup to create a response with
> the relevant status and content. the behaviour was observed and recored in
> the browser and using available debug tools.
>
> i used http POST to try and gather the behaviour which may be seen with
> the addition of new methods, testing over GET seemed a bit irrespective as
> it's only the browser's handling of retrieving a URL.
>
> the 3xx results are the most interesting as this is the area where there
> is the most room for interpretation on what an agent should do for the user.
>
> i'm updating it with as new status code tests and will split the table
> out, let me know if i can provide any more details.
>
> thanks,
> cam
>
> >
> > On 02/12/2011, at 7:59 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> >
> >> On 2011-12-01 21:55, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> >>> Was he testing how browsers handled the indicated code in response to
> a GET here?
> >>>
> >>> If so, what do the 3xx results he shows mean? Without the methodology,
> this raises more questions than it answers.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>
> >> It's all from a HTML form POST, AFAIU.
> >>
> >> Best regards, Julian
> >
> > --
> > Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
> >
>
>
>
>
>