W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: http methods

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 12:48:38 +0200
Message-ID: <520A0F06.5090901@gmx.de>
To: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2013-08-13 09:30, William Chan (陈智昌) wrote:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations-12
> seems to have the current method registrations. I'm not a web services
> guy, so my ignorance is expected, but wow, I didn't realize there were
> so many. Can someone explain if all these are truly necessary?

Are they all needed? No. Are some of them needed? Yes.

Is there any gain by "removing" them? No. HTTP components do not need to 
understand "extension" methods in order to properly deal with them.

> I'm asking this since a colleague of mine wrote this blog post
> (http://www.onebigfluke.com/2013/08/lets-remove-verbs-from-http-20.html), so
> I decided to look into it a bit. Note that I recognize that HTTP/2.0 is
> not the place to remove methods, but I'm curious if there has been any
> effort to simply HTTP by removing some exotic methods. If so, I think
> that'd be nice.

Removing uncommon methods doesn't simplify HTTP any more then removing 
uncommon status codes or header fields.

> I'm not really looking to champion a simplification effort here since I
> have other bike sheds more worthy of my paint, but I just wanted to see
> if it'd be easy to drop some unused methods.
> Cheers.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2013 10:49:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:14 UTC