- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:32:55 -0500
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>, www-ws-desc@w3.org, xml-dist-app@w3.org
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 01:42:04PM -0500, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > Finally, I think there's a case to be made that this is a significant > misuse of HTTP itself, which has a pretty strong notion of > request/response on a POST (you couldn't send the header on a GET.) I don't think it's quite that strong, Noah. I believe that the 202 "Accepted" response provides the desired "out" here, by being "intentionally non-committal". I've used it myself, on occasion, for exactly the scenario described. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Friday, 12 November 2004 19:31:53 UTC