Re: PUT to create, was Re: Proposal: normative changes for profiles

hello all.

On 2013-10-02 5:18 , "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
>On 25 Sep 2013, at 14:25, John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>And if it does PUT things there, do
>> they end up linked from anywhere?    What seems right to me, taking
>> a stab in the dark, is that at LDPC can have some associated URL
>> space, and if you do a PUT-to-create in that space, it's pretty much
>> the same as POSTing to the LDPC.     So the new PUT URL ends up as a
>> resource in the LDPC as well.
>This was closed in a hurry in Spain this summer. I don't think it was a
>very considerate closing

defining a "URI space" is not trivial, because typically, many more
constraints apply than just a prefix: things such as allowing/disallowing
multiple path segments, lengths of names/path-components, and
allowed/disallowed character sets for the names. just as a reminder: this
is why Slug exists, which allows clients (in this case with a POST to a
collection) to suggest a path component, but still gives services the
authority how to use that suggestion. if you don't do it that way, you
have to at least have a model how a service rejects a certain URI choice
to PUT to by a client.

cheers,

dret.

Received on Thursday, 3 October 2013 17:01:20 UTC