Re: POST & HTTP Update

On 25/11/10 16:15, Steve Harris wrote:
> On 2010-11-25, at 14:50, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> On 25/11/10 10:40, Steve Harris wrote:
>> ..
>>> The fact that POST updates are not yet fully specified in is a source of concern to us.
>>> - Steve
>> Could you say what isn't specified and should be?
> I don't remember exactly. I think it wasn't clear if the payload should me a mime form, or GET-style URI fields.
>> Currently I use the Content-type to get the syntax, the body is the payload and payload = RDF document from earlier in the spec.
> Where do you get the graph URI from?

If it's an http-rdf-update POST, it's ?graph= or ?default as for all the 
other operations specifically PUT.

That's hard to drive from a form - need a bit of client-side code to 
create the URL to POST to).  I don't drive HTTP RDF Update from a plain 
HTML form.


>> I return 200 if the target existed, and 201 if it didn't which is my (limited) understand of correct status codes for HTTP.
> Sounds reasonable. I don't know what we do offhand.
> - Steve

Received on Thursday, 25 November 2010 16:35:22 UTC