On 04/01/2011 02:01 PM, Nathan wrote:
fwd'ing to some relevant lists - would be very happy to see a proper
response from W3C / HTML WG chairs, particularly the question "And
*where* should this activity happen?"
Where is in bug reports:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
Should you (or anyone) wish to escalate a proposed RESOLUTION by the
editor, you will be encouraged to join the working group and participate
by creating a proposal and participating in the discussion:
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/#join
best, nathan
- Sam Ruby
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: PUT and DELETE methods in 200 code
Resent-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 13:45:27 +0000
Resent-From: ietf-http...@w3.org
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 09:41:52 -0400
From: mike amundsen <mam...@yahoo.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.resc...@gmx.de>
CC: Dominik Tomaszuk <ddo...@wp.pl>, ietf-http...@w3.org
References: <4d93381...@wp.pl> <4d933ecd.2040...@gmx.de>
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?
And *where* should this activity happen?
- here
- public-html-comments
- whatwg
- buglist
- etc.
[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2011Mar/thread.html
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2011Mar/0026.html
mca
http://amundsen.com/blog/
http://twitter.com@mamund
http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me
#RESTFest 2010
http://rest-fest.googlecode.com
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:31, Julian Reschke <julian.resc...@gmx.de>
wrote:
On 30.03.2011 16:02, Dominik Tomaszuk wrote:
Hi all,
In [1] there are specified HTTP methods in 200 code. I think that this
section should be extended to PUT and DELETE methods, because in [2] and
[3] authors write references to 200 code [1]. In my opinion PUT and
DELETE methods can be defined the same as POST (a representation
describing or containing the result of the action). It could be very
helpful especially for RESTful applications.
[1]
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-13#section-8.2.1
[2]
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-13#section-7.6
[3]
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-13#section-7.7
Regards,
Dominik Tomaszuk
Hi Dominik,
thanks for coming over here to discuss this.
Let's have a look at PUT. Three things that come to mind what a 200
response
could carry are:
- nothing (the server did what you asked for, and that's really all
you need
to know) -- this is what many (most) WebDAV servers will do
- return a small status message
- return the new representation of the resource
There are probably more options. I'm not sure the HTTP spec can/should
mandate any.
So also recent discussion of "Prefer"...: starting at
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2011JanMar/0291.html>.
BR, Julian
