Specifically, isn't [1] a fine example of how not to use PUT? The
first example on [2] looks like a job for PUT, although POST is OK too,
I guess. The example given at the bottom of [2] looks like a valid use
of POST, but change method to PUT and you're back at square [1], right?
Has Microsoft's "Windows Live Contacts API" confused PUT and POST? [1] http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb447763.aspx [2]...
Eric J. Bowman
eric@...
May 12, 2007 4:57 am
... Hash: SHA1 ... Eric> Has Microsoft's "Windows Live Contacts API" confused PUT and Eric> POST? Absolutely. PUT makes sure the resource returned at the URL...
... Well.... Yaron and I talked about exactly this issue, though I don't remember seeing that specific section in the documents I reviewed (the actual spec,...
... [1] is wrong (I didn't bother looking at [2]). Let's make up a document format to illustrate. You send a GET and receive this in response: <foo> ...
Another consideration that should be discussed is the interaction of partial updates using XML representations with any required-ness in schema definitions. If...
Regarding PUT, I'm slightly confused: ... so what would be the assumptions an intermediary (such as a cache) could rely on? If I PUT something through a...
... Just the definition of PUT. ... Sure. I haven't seen a cache that does it though. ... PUT requests always include the complete representation by...
... Is that right? I think it is, as long as the media type allows GET requests to respond with HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: application/lightbulb+xml <bulb> ...
... Sounds right. ... Hmm. Why would that need to be part of the protocol? As long as the client understands the media type and the meaning of PUT, and the ...
... Is that really the case? My understanding is that the server is not required return a bit-for-bit copy or even a semantically identical copy of the PUT...
... I would think all an intermediary should do is invalidate that representation. But this is certainly a good candidate for clarification in a potential...
... Well, the intermediary would certainly need to also see a 2xx response to the PUT request before making that representation available, which is a form of...
... Obviously if the intermediary saw anything other than a 2xx, it couldn’t cache the request body. But even if it did see a 2xx response, the semantics of...
... That;s an arguable point. Some people think it's OK for the origin server to do anything it wants with a PUT body and still return a 200 OK. Some people...
Elliotte Harold
elharo@...
May 17, 2007 1:19 pm
... To my mind if a server understands a representation - rather than treating the entities as opaque and requiring a relatively agnostic storage in a...
... As far as I understand, an intermediate has no way to predict a future GET response based on the PUT request body. Unless it has additional information...
... As I see it, if a server accepts a representation via PUT, then that representation *is* a representation of the targetted resource. It may not be one...
... Yep. ... If you do so, what ETag and Last-Modified headers do you serve it with? How long do you keep that entry? It seems to me that this is an attempt to...
... Last-Modified would be the time the 2xx response was received. ETag wouldn't be set for the scenario I had in mind (non-surrogate proxy). ... Could be. ...
... We've been through this in APP land recently without coming to consensus. My continued belief (not shared by all) is that the specified PUT request means...
Elliotte Harold
elharo@...
May 15, 2007 8:58 pm
... I was thinking about more about this, and seems like an error, or at least sloppy, to inentionally spec PUT this way, because the meaning of the client's...
I'm not trying to interpret Microsoft's API here, but it's similar to what I'm working on right now, in a way. So I want to make sure *I* have this right....
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
Send Email
