Julian Reschke writes: > For the record: a GET (or a HEAD) request can be sent in a way > (cache-control: no-cache) such that intermediaries are disallowed to > return a cached response. So cacheability itself IMHO is not an argument > in favor of POST. Fair enough, but I think it's also true that a user agent, search spider, etc. would be compatible with Web Architecture if it did a GET on the URIs in question in cases where the user had not in fact cliked on a link. I can't see a reason why software that's written with awareness of the ping attribute would do this, except maybe maliciously, but as far as I know GET is distinguished not just by being (typically) cacheable, but also by the fact that you can do a GET on any URI at anytime. If someone found out that their link access statistics were messed up due to various agents doing GETs, I think Web Architecture would give them very few grounds for complaint. Noah -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2008 02:28:12 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:55 UTC