- From: Mike Dierken <mike@dataconcert.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:53:06 -0800
- To: www-tag@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Architecture#Content "The introduction of any other method apart from GET which is idempotent is also incorrect, because the results of such an operation effectively form a separate address space, which violates the universality." I though that PUT was idempotent - it is okay to do the same PUT twice without bad stuff happening. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-discuss/2001Dec/0008.html "As HTTP is a state coordination language, even if my PUT request lost the connection after the PUT was performed, I have choices. I can check the state of the thermostat with a GET to see if it's set to 21C, or I can re-invoke the PUT, which works because PUT is idempotent." From Mark Baker in private mail: "Idempotent just means that 'the side-effects of N > 0 identical requests is the same as for a single request'. So if you didn't know whether PUT worked or not, you could do it again without fear." Mike PS If there is too much noise from non-members (i.e. me) on this mailing list, I'll make my comments privately to a member(s) first. > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Berners-Lee [mailto:timbl@w3.org] > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:48 AM > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: [Minutes] 7 Jan 2002 TAG teleconference > > > > The Chair also asked participants to review the early > sections of Tim > > Berners-Lee's "Web Architecture from 50,000 feet": > > http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Architecture > > and http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms > > >
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2002 15:54:03 UTC