RE: MKCOL with entity request body

• From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
• Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 13:29:50 -0700
• To: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
• Message-ID: <004901bea624$2c61e840$d115c380@ics.uci.edu>

> > If a MKCOL includes an entity request body which according to
> > the spec might "create collections, members of a collections,
> > bodies of members, and properties on the collections or memebers",
> > then shouldn't the MKCOL method be able to return a 207 multistatus
> > in order to describe what it did or what individual things it might
> > have failed on?
>
> Makes sense to me.
>

Makes sense to me too.

The entire intent of this requirement was extensibility.  We wanted to
ensure that implementors wouldn't add code that rejected a MKCOL immediately
if it had a request body, since this would make future extension of MKCOL
impossible.

- Jim

Received on Monday, 24 May 1999 16:41:05 UTC