- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 19:11:35 +0200
- To: <miles@milessabin.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: ext Miles Sabin [mailto:miles@milessabin.com] > Sent: 12 February, 2003 17:49 > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: Proposed issue: site metadata hook (slight variation) > > > > Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote, > > > > Also, how do you PUT/DELETE/POST to that metadata, just > using the > > > > Metadata: header? It seems morally equivalent to a set > of M(XXXX) > > > > methods which has the same problem. > > > > > > It _is_ the moral of Patricks M(XXX) methods ... but _without_ the > > > problems ;-) > > > > Ummm... what problems ;-) > > Umm ... I'm repeating myself. > > Show me how to send an MGET request using the standard Java > HTTP client. That's a practical problem caused by (short sighted) limitations of the Java SDK. It's not a technical problem with the proposal. I'm asking for technical problems. > I'm looking at it's source code right now and the only methods > supported are GET, POST, HEAD, OPTIONS, PUT, DELETE and TRACE. If you > tried to do setRequestMethod("MGET") you'd have a ProtocolException > thrown at you explaining the "MGET" is an invalid HTTP method. > > I'm only using Java as an example because I'm intimately > familiar with > it's implementation. But I'd be astonished if there weren't > many, many > other HTTP client toolkits which behaved similarly. Which > means that as > it stands your proposal is dependent on widespread software upgrades. No. Not software upgrades. SDK/API upgrades. Existing software that has not needed to use the new methods will continue to not need to use the new methods. And a simple tweak of the SDK (probably just commenting out or changing a few lines relating to the thrown exception, fixes that problem *in the SDK* for all future applications. > You might not see that as a problem, but I do ;-) Practical, yes. Technical, no. Do you see any *technical* problems with the MGET proposal? Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2003 12:11:38 UTC