W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: [Fwd: draft-reschke-http-addmember-00]

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:54:16 -0800
Message-Id: <09334919a9cfa987692a0e20b90f5810@gbiv.com>
Cc: "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
To: <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>

On Feb 16, 2005, at 9:46 AM, Jim Whitehead wrote:
> RFC 2616 states:
> "The actual function performed by the POST method is determined by the
> server and is usually dependent on the Request-URI."
> From a client perspective this makes POST unreliable, and leads to the
> desire to define a new method.

The action will either succeed or fail.  If it succeeds, the client
will receive the exact same response from POST that it would have
received from a new method.  If it fails, the client will receive
the same potential set of failure responses as it might have from
a new method.

The only way you could claim that a new method would be more reliable
is if the client knows the exact implementation of the resource
being requested, which is something that a client does not know
with HTTP, and even if it did, it is far more likely that it will
know how the server and all intermediaries will respond to the
existing POST method than it could know about their response to
a new method that has zero deployment.

Received on Thursday, 17 February 2005 05:54:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:33 UTC