On 05/04/2011, at 6:01 AM, mike amundsen wrote:
> Cam:
>
> my comments are inline...
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 13:03, Cameron Heavon-Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Feedback on: Supporting PUT and DELETE with HTML FORMS @ 2011-04-04
>>
>> 1.2. Assumptions
>>
>> I think that DELETE requires the same support as PUT and POST. The
>> requirement for this was posted to public-html-comments:
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2011Apr/0020.html
>>
>> I would suggest that DELETE uses the same URI encoding rules as for GET by
>> default, with the option of also being allowed to be encoded in the same
>> enctypes as for PUT and POST. This will allow for a DELETE request using
>> query parameters to be constructed through a form or, for the other
>> enctypes, for the DELETE request to be embedded with configurable attributes.
>>
>> For example, it would be great to be able to generate a DELETE request to a
>> uri like:
>>
>> <form action="http://example.org/user"” method=”delete” if-match="*">
>> <input name="hat-size" type="text" value="" />
>> <input type="submit" />
>> </form>
>>
>> *** REQUEST
>> DELETE user?hat-size=small HTTP/1.1
>> Host: www.example.org
>>
>
> While I am not personally convinced of this approach for deletes, I've
> added it to the document to make sure it's recorded for discussion.
Great, thanks.
To illustrate it's usefulness, i would frame the requirement in response to a
user's problem.
What other mechanism would be available for a user to issue DELETE over a
collection of sub-resources?
To continue with the example of users, if the base user resource is /user and
each individual user is located at /user/{id}, what mechanism is there to issue
a DELETE request covering a sub-set of users?
If we can issue requests to GET a sub-set of sub-resources, and if that is
deemed to be a valid resource, then why can we not issue a DELETE over the same
resource? ie
GET /user?hat-size=small
DELETE /user?hat-size=small
these are both valid resources and hence both valid requests.
the problem is now whether it is possible for a user to initiate this request
for DELETE as they currently can for GET.
>
>>
>> 4.4. Optional Added FORM Content-Types
>>
>> I'm not sure there is need to add JSON to form entypes. As JSON is
>> javascript data format it could be expected that this be used only with XHR.
>> Maybe a use case for support would be if javascript were required to
>> manipulate data prior to the request being sent, but then couldn't JS just
>> create the JSON from the form itself?
>
> Understood.
>
>>
>>
>> 4.5. Optional Support for Prefer Header
>>
>> I don't think this is necessary, if Accept header is adhered to. Without
>> knowing the full context the Prefer header was targeted at, I'm not sure i
>> understand the need for it, especially in this context.
>
> The Prefer I-D offers agents the ability to use settings such as
> "send-no-content", "send-status-only", etc. when making requests. I
> don't see a way to do this w/ Accept headers right now.
>
> Again, I think this "Prefer" header is interesting for HTML.FORMS, but
> not a pre-requisite for supporting PUT/DELETE.
I think the Prefer header is interesting...though i am unconvinced that it is
necessary, or even useful for html.
Automated agents would seem to gain the most from its inclusion, but then html
isn't really for them anyway.
>
>>
>>
>> 4.6. Support for Atom-Style PUT/DELETE
>>
>> I would be inclined to remove any default application of etags. If the
>> server has full access to etags (and full understanding), why can it not
>> just apply to the form as or if required?
>
> Understood. I, too, am not convinced of this option. However, GET
> makes regular use of ETags already.
>
OK. No problems.
Thanks,
Cam
>>
>>
>> cam
>>
>> On 04/04/2011, at 5:41 AM, mike amundsen wrote:
>>
>>> All:
>>>
>>> I've updated/reformatted the PUT/DELETE with HTML FORMS document[1]
>>> with the following:
>>> - Added "integrate w/ existing servers..." to the Goals section.
>>> - Added "Binary Transfers" to the Scenarios section.
>>> - Added Julian Reschke's query regarding exsting browsers handling
>>> 201/202/204 response to the Handling Responses section.
>>> - Added "Optional Added FORM Content Types", "Optional Support for
>>> Prefer Header", and "Support for Atom-Style PUT/DELETE" to the "Other
>>> Considerations" section.
>>>
>>> I think this reflects the key feedback from the last couple days.
>>>
>>> I've not had time to doing any research/testing on Julian's query
>>> regarding current browsers' handling of 201/202/204 responses. I
>>> figure browser folks can chime in here, eh?
>>>
>>> NOTE: I've cross-posted this to:
>>> - ietf-http-wg
>>> - public-html
>>> - public-html-comments
>>>
>>> If this is overkill, let me know.
>>>
>>> [1]http://amundsen.com/examples/put-delete-forms/
>>>
>>> mca
>>> http://amundsen.com/blog/
>>> http://twitter.com@mamund
>>> http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me
>>>
>>>
>>> #RESTFest 2010
>>> http://rest-fest.googlecode.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 17:48, mike amundsen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I've posted a document[1] that shows one way in which HTML FORMS can
>>>> support PUT/DELETE w/o the need for plug-ins or scripting. It's a
>>>> quick draft but I think it covers the basics.
>>>>
>>>> If this is not in the desired format let me know.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://amundsen.com/examples/put-delete-forms/
>>>>
>>>> mca
>>>> http://amundsen.com/blog/
>>>> http://twitter.com@mamund
>>>> http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> #RESTFest 2010
>>>> http://rest-fest.googlecode.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 14:26, mike amundsen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>> Personally I'd like to see a concrete proposal how PUT and DELETE will
>>>>>> work
>>>>>> (examples with HTML and HTTP interaction). Right now it's totally not
>>>>>> clear
>>>>>> to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And *where* shod this activity happen?
>>>>>>> - here
>>>>> </snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Makes sense to me; I'll work up a few examples of HTTP/HTML this
>>>>> evening and post a link. If/when others do the same we can use them
>>>>> all as references in any discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> mca
>>>>> http://amundsen.com/blog/
>>>>> http://twitter.com@mamund
>>>>> http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> #RESTFest 2010
>>>>> http://rest-fest.googlecode.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 14:14, Julian Reschke <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On 01.04.2011 15:41, mike amundsen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I see the bug has been re-opened.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I see there has been some discussion on public-html-comments regarding
>>>>>>> PUT/DELETE[1].
>>>>>>> I also note at least one suggestion in that thread was to discuss this
>>>>>>> on the whatwg list[2].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is the preferred way to proceed here?
>>>>>>> - List concerns/reservations and deal with them as they come up?
>>>>>>> - Draw up a straw man proposal (is there a standard format for this)?
>>>>>>> - Some other process?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally I'd like to see a concrete proposal how PUT and DELETE will
>>>>>> work
>>>>>> (examples with HTML and HTTP interaction). Right now it's totally not
>>>>>> clear
>>>>>> to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And *where* shod this activity happen?
>>>>>>> - here
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here should be fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards, Julian
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
