durusmail: quixote-users: non-idempotent GETs
non-idempotent GETs
2005-05-10
2005-05-10
2005-05-10
2005-05-10
2005-05-10
2005-05-11
2005-05-10
2005-05-10
2005-05-10
2005-05-29
2005-05-29
2005-05-29
non-idempotent GETs
A.M. Kuchling
2005-05-10
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 10:59:39AM -0600, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> I think the hardcore REST people have their heads a little in the
> clouds.  It's not possible to make most browsers use PUT or DELETE,
> AFAIK.

Many of the REST people are more interested in defining protocols for
use by a front end rather than a browser, e.g. my Python program uses urllib

> BTW, "idempotent" is not actually enough.  "Safe" is actually the
> key phrase in the specification.

Surely "safe" is a weaker condition than "idempotent"?  After all, GET
is never idempotent if the web server is logging accesses, but having
extra accesses recorded is safe for the client.

--amk

reply