Opened 8 years ago

Closed 8 years ago

Last modified 8 years ago

#547 closed editorial (wontfix)

clarify PUT on content negotiated resource

Reported by: julian.reschke@… Owned by: draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics@…
Priority: normal Milestone: 26
Component: p2-semantics Severity: In IESG Evaluation
Keywords: Cc:

Description (last modified by fielding@…)

Ted Lemon

Comment (2013-12-19)

The paragraph crossing the page break at the bottom of page 16:

   For example, if a client makes a PUT request on a negotiated resource
   and the origin server accepts that PUT (without redirection), then
   the new state of that resource is expected to be consistent with the
   one representation supplied in that PUT; the Content-Location cannot
   be used as a form of reverse content selection identifier to update
   only one of the negotiated representations.  If the user agent had
   wanted the latter semantics, it would have applied the PUT directly
   to the Content-Location URI.

It's good that there's an example here, but this creates more questions than it answers: if I do a PUT to a particular URI, for which there are currently multiple representations of the document in different languages, based on a GET that had a specific language representation, is the semantics being specified here that the other language representations go away? That's kind of what it sounds like.

  • Yes, that is exactly what it means. If an origin server does not want such a thing to occur, then it won't allow PUT on the negotiated URI (only on the specific URIs for each kind of representation).

This text makes sense for different content encodings like JSON and XML, where the server might be able to generate one from the other, but it's giving me a headache thinking about it in terms of natural language. Am I missing the point here? If so, could this be clarified, or did I just not drink enough coffee this morning?

  • The server will tell the client which resources can be PUT and which ones are generated indirectly.

Change History (3)

comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…

  • Resolution set to wontfix
  • Status changed from new to closed

Discussed on the mailing list; we prefer to keep the text as is.

comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by fielding@…

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by fielding@…

  • Description modified (diff)

remove bits that are in #548

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.