You probably should reserve sending an entity for POST and PUT methods (and PROPFIND/PROPPATCH, if you're doing WebDAV). The HTTP 1,1 spec ( http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt) is somewhat ambiguous with regard to sending an entity along with GET or DELETE etc. There is some work currently afoot (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/httpbis-charter.html) to clarify the specification; the work so far may support the idea (Payload, 4.) that any implementation may send an entity anytime. There was some discussion about this on the Restlet list already with differing opinions about interpretation. But, in practicality, some currently extant proxies and client-side filtering systems do not pass the entity bodies for HTTP verbs other than POST and PUT. So if your application must traverse the public Web, you should probably avoid using entities except for the verbs where the entity is already semantically significant in HTTP. Restlet elides some things for purely practical reasons involving connectors, as well as to support design along best practices.
I'm curious though, what did you mean to send in the DELETE request as the entity? - Rob On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Surjendu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can't I pass an entity as part of HTTP.DELETE? Does it act > the same way as HTTP.GET? > > Even if I am passing entity as part of METHOD.DELETE in my request, > the Resource > class in the server doesn't receive anything. > > getRequest().isEntityAvailable() is false. > > And if the answer is yes can someone tell me > whats the rational behind it? > >
