- From: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:48:36 +0200
- To: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Cc: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>, James Leigh <james@3roundstones.com>, "public-ldp@w3.org" <public-ldp@w3.org>
Hey Erik, am I not reading the HTTP spec right then? Proper interpretation of a PUT request presumes that the user agent knows what target resource is desired. A service that is intended to select a proper URI on behalf of the client, after receiving a state- changing request, SHOULD be implemented using the POST method rather than PUT. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-17#section-6.6 Martynas On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu> wrote: > hello martynas. > > > On 2013-03-14 9:28 , Martynas Jusevičius wrote: >> >> b) the resource describing person does not exist. >> You mint new URIs of the resource and the person and PUT the RDF into >> resource's URI. >> What's wrong with that? A client could that automatically. > > > it's not the client's thing to decide on URIs for new resources, at least in > the usual case. servers manage the URI namespace and assign URIs for new > resources. clients may suggest URIs (well, mostly certain path components of > them) using HTTP Slug, but they cannot depend on the server actually using > these components. > > cheers, > > dret.
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2013 16:49:07 UTC