On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 08:39:41 +0100, Sylvain Hellegouarch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mind you considering that RFC 4287 is very clear on what makes an Atom entry a valid one I imagine APP servers which don't have the necessary context will decide to reject the request altogether.
Am I the only one pondering and worrying about what the different server implementations will respond to invalid client requests (as, for example, an invalid Atom document)? How can the client implementors be interoperable and compatible with each other and every server implementation if the specification says absolutely nothing about what to expect when something goes wrong?
HTTP covers some of the possible errors one might encounter, but I believe there are several cases in APP where errors might occur that HTTP does not cover and that server implementors will treat very differently. In most server application frameworks, unhandled exceptions give the response "500 Server Error". Is that the appropriate response to give on most errors? Which errors should yield which 4xx response? Is this not an issue? How can a client tell the user how to correct something if the client have no idea what response to expect from the server?
-- Asbjørn Ulsberg -=|=- http://virtuelvis.com/quark/ «He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»
