- From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 12:02:15 -0800
- To: "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>, masinter@parc.xerox.com
- Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
But how do you feel about PUT w/the Source header? That solves the message/external-body problem. Yaron > -----Original Message----- > From: Roy T. Fielding [SMTP:fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU] > Sent: Friday, March 21, 1997 10:39 AM > To: masinter@parc.xerox.com > Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > Subject: Re: Distributed Authoring Proposals > > >I suggest considering eliminating COPY and instead using > >PUT, but when the value being PUT is Content-Type: > >message/external-body, then the server can copy the data > >from the original source. > > I disagree. Doing a PUT of a message/external-body means you want > to create or replace a resource that consists of a > message/external-body. > The same problem applies with using multipart/related to imply a > different > action than that requested by the method. > > Not surprisingly, I prefer COPY for asking the server to perform a > copy, > and the PATCH method for asking the server to perform a partial > update. > PATCH had the additional benefit that it was independent of > content-type, > and thus I wouldn't have to argue with Fabio about VTML or the MIME > folks > about multipart/mixed+message/partial or any number of other data > formats > that are great for some tasks and not for others. > > These and other failed attempts at standardizing WEBDAV functionality > within HTTP can be seen in > > http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/history/draft-ietf-http-v11-spec- > 01.html > > .....Roy
Received on Friday, 21 March 1997 15:02:25 UTC