Re: Seeking clarification about the use of the HTTP binding

Mark Baker <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.description,gmane.text.xml.distributed
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 01:42:04PM -0500, [email protected] wrote:
> Finally, I think there's a case to be made that this is a significant 
> misuse of HTTP itself, which has a pretty strong notion of 
> request/response on a POST (you couldn't send the header on a GET.)

I don't think it's quite that strong, Noah.  I believe that the 202
"Accepted" response provides the desired "out" here, by being
"intentionally non-committal".  I've used it myself, on occasion, for
exactly the scenario described.

Mark.
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.