RE: media types

This has been suggested by a number of people and I am starting to like
it. The only real argument against it is that it makes it more difficult
to parse requests. If a request is a copy I want to send it to program A
but if it is a delete I want to send it to program B. However as I
expect we will agree on a compromise to introduce new method names but
allow for the use of post and depend on the application/webdav mime
type, I think we can make everyone equally unhappy. Which, of course, is
the definition of compromise. =)
			Yaron

>-----Original Message-----
>From:	Gregory J. Woodhouse [SMTP:gjw@wnetc.com]
>Sent:	Tuesday, November 12, 1996 10:36 PM
>To:	w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
>Subject:	media types
>
>I haven't said anything about this because I've been relecutant to
>criticize a proposal on aesthetic grounds. but the idea of using separate
>media types for each action really bothers me. Why don't we introduce a
>single media type application/webdav and then use a parameter for the
>specific action, as in
>
>application/webdav;action=delete
>
>---
>Gregory Woodhouse     gjw@wnetc.com
>home page:            http://www.wnetc.com/home.html
>resource page:        http://www.wnetc.com/resource/
>

Received on Wednesday, 13 November 1996 14:07:33 UTC