- 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