On 6/13/06, Joe Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/13/06, Mark Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If it's not capable of storing entities as requested, then it > shouldn't send a successful response message to a PUT request, since > that's what PUT means. I'm sorry but there is nothing in RFC 2616 that calls for a 'byte-for-byte' interpretation of PUT.
There's nothing about Mark's message calls for that interpretation. Would stripping insignificant whitespace be a problem? Would re-ordering namespace declarations? Re-ordering elements? Stripping comments? Changing encodings? I think everyone would agree that those things don't matter. There's a grey area here. Take the dogma somewhere else. -- Robert Sayre "I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time."
