RE: Proposed HTTP SEARCH method update

Looks interesting. But, what exactly is the use case here. Thanks.

-Palanivelan
DMTS-Engg, VerizonLabs

From: Phil Hunt [mailto:phil.hunt@oracle.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 11:41 PM
To: Wenbo Zhu
Cc: Julian Reschke; Roy T. Fielding; Zhong Yu; Philippe Mougin; James Snell; ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposed HTTP SEARCH method update

It might be useful for someone to profile the HTTP SEARCH draft to show a use case that people can see the trade-offs.

That way we can see an example of some details.

I think SEARCH is sufficiently defined in line with the template established by the other HTTP methods. Over defining at this level can cause more problems than good.

I have something in mind if people are interested.

Phil

@independentid
www.independentid.com<http://www.independentid.com>
phil.hunt@oracle.com<mailto:phil.hunt@oracle.com>

On May 22, 2015, at 10:41 AM, Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com<mailto:wenboz@google.com>> wrote:



On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de<mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>> wrote:
On 2015-05-22 09:00, Wenbo Zhu wrote:
...
Rather than seeing SEARCH as related to GET, maybe what we really need
is just a safe/Idempotent POST (aka rpc). With reduced semantics the
benefits of such a new method may become more obvious.
...


And that new method would be different from SEARCH exactly how?

Anything that does not apply to POST could be dropped, i.e. not limiting this method to search-like semantics (which is not well-defined or understood, and often overlaps with GETs).

And the method name needs a separate discussion ... and maybe SEARCH is good enough (not because it's already implemented).


Best regards, Julian