- From: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:59:35 -0400
- To: WebDAV Working Group <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
"Clemm, Geoff" wrote: > HTTP headers are a poor way of marshalling method specific > information. A header exists in a global namespace, and should be > reserved for things that proxies need to look at. It *might* be useful for a proxy to know that a resource has been moved to a trash folder--it can update its cache. On the other hand, looking through the trash folder isn't going to be all that common. Uh...ah! And the HTTP/1.1 definition of DELETE semi-forbids moving the resource to a trash folder that can be accessed via HTTP: the server SHOULD NOT indicate success unless, at the time the response is given, it intends to delete the resource or move it to an inaccessible location. (RFC-2616, section 9.7, first paragraph.) > So if you want to extend DELETE, I would suggest following the > standard WebDAV approach and add an XML request body to the DELETE > method. It might also be useful to have a response body, to indicate what action was actually taken. -- /==============================================================\ |John Stracke | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.| |Chief Scientist |=============================================| |eCal Corp. |"The avalanche has already started. It is too| |francis@ecal.com|late for the pebbles to vote." --Kosh | \==============================================================/
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2001 12:52:24 UTC