- From: James Fuller <jim@webcomposite.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:24:15 +0100
- To: Austin Wright <aaa@bzfx.net>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
+1 ... XML may not be everyone's cup of tea but there is continuing not insignificant usage on todays web (ex. aws ec2 command default uses xml 'under the covers' and there are many, widely deployed machine to machine systems using XML which may want to leverage SEARCH method differently then webdav) ... not arguing the merits/non merits of any data format ... I feel strongly that restricting a data format usage into the future seems overly constraining. Generally I see the attraction of piggybacking on top of existing WEBDAV rfc though curious what a standalone rfc defining a SRCH method might look like. cheers, Jim Fuller On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 21:43, Austin Wright <aaa@bzfx.net> wrote: > > > > On Nov 3, 2020, at 18:07, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > As discussed in the October 202 Interim, this is a Call for Adoption for the HTTP SEARCH method draft: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-search-method-02 > > Please indicate whether you support adoption in response to this e-mail; information about intent to implement (or use) it is also useful. > > The Call for Adoption will end on 18 November 2020. > > Cheers, > > Mark and Tommy > > > > I’m very much in favor of a safe variation of POST. > > However, > > > for backwards compatibility with existing WebDAV implementations, SEARCH requests that use the text/xml or application/xml content types MUST be processed per the requirements established by [RFC5323]. > > I think this is too restrictive. If it’s not possible to relax the RFC5323 requirements, I would favor using REPORT instead. > > I intend to implement whatever is adopted. > > Thanks, > > Austin Wright.
Received on Thursday, 5 November 2020 09:24:38 UTC