- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 09:04:20 +0200
- To: edgar@edgarschwarz.de
- CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
edgar@edgarschwarz.de schrieb: > ... > I will have to implement one method less in my server and also the RFC will > be shorter without APPEND. There will only be a lot of stuff just duplicated. > This said I'm very happy to see that a standard for sending diffs is discussed > again. Because it really doesn't make sense to send a complete big document > to a DeltaV server if you only correct a single letter typo :-) > ... Maybe it should also be mentioned that that lot's of people are really uneasy about defining new HTTP methods. PATCH has the nice property that it's not really new, it just needed a proper definition (so keep in mind that if you call something PATCH, it really should be identical or similar to what already has been described in <http://ftp.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/history/draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-01.txt>. APPEND doesn't have this property. Furthermore, it's just a "convenience method", because you can alway define a PATCH request that does exactly the same. Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 7 August 2006 07:04:40 UTC