Re: WebDav methods and idempotency

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
> On Feb 25, 2005, at 12:34 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> 
>> You are right, MKCOL isn't idempotent, nor is MOVE. I'll raise issues 
>> against RFC2518bis, RFC3253bis, RFC3648bis and RFC3744bis so this 
>> get's fixed in future revisions.
> 
> 
> Do you mean that MKCOL *is* idempotent, and MOVE isn't?

Yep, sorry. MKCOL is idempotent.

-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

Received on Saturday, 26 February 2005 08:08:32 UTC