On Jan 22, 2008 1:30 AM, Aristotle Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Zbigniew Lukasiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-21 07:40]: > > While we are at that - I do understand the need to divide the > > operations into the 'indempotent' and 'non-indempotent' classes > > (because of caching and predictive link loading) - but what is > > really the practical argument for having two more classes (PUT > > and DELETE)? > > I don't understand this question. It sounds like you have some > confusion about several distinct things and that you don't > actually understand what idempotence is. Can you try to explain > a bit more what you are trying to ask? Are you just asking why > there are more verbs than GET and POST? Are you asking about why > it's important to categorise verbs as non-/safe in addition to > non-/idempotent? Is it something all together different?
The first one. Why you need to split the class of non-idempotent operations into three more categories (POST, PUT and DELETE). -- Zbigniew Lukasiak http://brudnopis.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
