>
>> A logical consequence would then be to allow creating a resource within
>> a container using PUT in the same way.
>
> Could you explain that? My understanding is that PUT replaces the
> entire contents at the target.
>
> ---------
> PUT /foo
> Host: example.com
>
> <> a foaf:document .
> ---------
> had better put that RDF at the requests target (adding server
> properties) and have <> as <http://example.com/foo>
Well, I agree that the PUT would need to name the resource - which actually, would help in the "what is URI of POSTed document" discussion :)
but, really, I think we need to think about how we are using POST.
Would it be possible to have a new issue to re-consider this assumption please Arnaud ?
thanks,
Roger
> or things get very
> weird in the relationship of PUT then a GET on the same URI.
>
> Andy
>
>