RE: CR123: Simultaneous presence of {http method} and {safe}

+1.  I don't think "all GETs are safe interactions" (which I still don't
believe is 100% true) is the same as "all safe interactions are GETs".  A
little of my own blog-lobbying at
http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!F985A6952BC07C4!617.entry.


Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Jacek Kopecky
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 6:46 AM
> To: Jean-Jacques Moreau
> Cc: WSD Public
> Subject: Re: CR123: Simultaneous presence of {http method} and {safe}
> 
> 
> Jean-Jacques,
> as Jonathan has already mentioned, I believe, one can have a safe
> operation that uses POST.
> 
> Safety is used for defaulting to GET so that you can have interfaceless
> bindings that nevertheless use GET for some operations. Such defaulting
> may even be incorrect in light of how much request data can be
> represented usefully and interoperably in a URI. There are practical
> limits to that.
> 
> I don't think it's useful to tie {http method} and {safe} more than they
> are tied now.
> Best regards,
> Jacek
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 14:51 +0100, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
> > I've implemented the current resolution for CR123.
> >
> > However, I think we need to do a little more. Indeed, currently:
> > - if both {http method} (or, in its absence, {http method default}) and
> > {safe} are set, {http method} takes precendence, i.e. the value of the
> > {safe} property is ignored.
> >
> > This could be an issue, for example if {http method}="POST" and
> > {safe}="true".
> >
> > Two alternatives:
> > a. Indicate {http method} and {safe} cannot be present simultaneously.
> >
> > b. {safe} takes precendence over {http method} (as {http method} already
> > takes precendence over {http method default}).
> >
> > There's some appealing symmetry in b., but a. may be straigther.
> >
> > JJ.
> >