W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2020

Re: Call for Adoption: SEARCH method

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 05:46:15 +0100
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <00838246-acb5-6ad3-5864-9cce8521d9ca@gmx.de>
Am 19.11.2020 um 04:39 schrieb James M Snell:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 12:18 Philippe Mougin <pmougin@acm.org
> <mailto:pmougin@acm.org>> wrote:
>
>
>     Hello,
>
>
>     I don't support adoption because:
>
>
>     - The introduction provides an inaccurate and self contradictory
>     description of GET, as detailed in this message:
>     https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2020JulSep/0198.html
>     <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2020JulSep/0198.html>
>
>
>     - The name of the method appears too restrictive, as a safe and
>     idempotent equivalent to POST, which is what the draft essentially
>     defines, would be useful beyond search operations.
>
>
> To be clear, this is not intended as a safe, idempotent equivalent to
> POST. It is intended specifically to cover search/query operations which
> are often ambiguously represented as GET or POST. I'm not quite sure
> what a safe idempotent equivalent to POST would even be, but this is not
> it.
> ...

FWIW, I disagree with that. Ignore the method name for a moment, and
what's left is a retrieval operation similar to GET which additionally
takes the request payload into account.

> ...

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 19 November 2020 04:46:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 19 November 2020 04:46:32 UTC