Thanks Artemy, 'set' vs 'put' took some consideration. Basically: many Javascript APIs use 'get', 'set', 'unset' methods. I used to use POST (as in 'create') but now find it's easier to deal with network failure using only PUT (as in 'set') as POST is not idempotent. As mentioned above, where the server supports PUT, your Http.set would be upgraded from a POST to a PUT. Where it does not, your Http.set would remain a POST so you get the best of both worlds. I guess you could do Http.Get, Http.Post, Http.Put and Http.Delete static methods to get around 'delete' being reserved. This then is quite extensible, one downside being that the method names are then upper camelCase. Although I would argue for point 2 above, I do think that Http.set, get, unset sits better next to other Javascript APIs. Excuse me if "memorable" came off as "better": what I meant is "easy to remember".
Thanks Andrew, looking forward. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to prototype-core-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
