Good resources Ted, and yes you are probably right, people might not care
about baby seals.
Here is the gist from the w3 site:
- Use GET if:
- The interaction is more like a question (i.e., it is a safe
operation such as a query, read operation, or lookup).
- Use POST if:
- The interaction is more like an order, or
- The interaction changes the state of the resource in a way that the
user would perceive (e.g., a subscription to a service), or
- The user be held accountable for the results of the interaction.
However, before the final decision to use HTTP GET or POST, please also
consider considerations for sensitive
data<http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet.html#sensitive>and
practical
considerations <http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet.html#practical>.
- Matt
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Ted Han <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This link is perhaps a bit more authoritative!
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet.html#checklist
>
> oh yeah, also: Posting in Epic Thread! :)
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Ted Han <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Baby seals are unsympathetic anyway. But everybody loves polar bears
> > (and they eat baby seals too!).
> >
> > Seriously object destruction via GET is no fun to mess around with.
> > And Dr Freeze's description should read "a crawler *will* delete your
> > objects". It's worth it to read up about REST and why it's structured
> > the way it is. Merb isn't opinionated about how you want to build
> > your stuff, but it is opinionated about respect for standards
> > adherence (hopefully not blindly so [Yeh, gerrof my case, Zed!]).
> > anyway check out rtomayko's post about it, it's a good place to start:
> > http://tomayko.com/writings/rest-to-my-wife
> >
> > here's another good explanation of why post vs get matters:
> > http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/forms/methods.html#why<http://www.cs.tut.fi/%7Ejkorpela/forms/methods.html#why>
> >
> > Really, it's bad mojo. (your users will hate you, it'll make the
> > universe divide by 0, and google will eat your babies) Don't do it!
> >
> > -T
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Matt Aimonetti <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> I agree with Yehuda, the reason why I didn't mention the crawlers is
> because
> >> you might protect your link and only show it to admins for instance.
> >>
> >> Btw, me not being your friend anymore should be a compelling enough
> reason
> >> to do things right ;)
> >>
> >> - Matt
> >>
> >> p.s: what if I were telling you every time you make a GET request on a
> >> modifying action, a little baby seal dies in Antarctica, would that
> help?
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Nicolas Cavigneaux <
> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Jim used another way to tell it but I think it's more explonatory this
> >>> way.
> >>>
> >>> Crawler and "WebAccelerators" are evil!
> >>>
> >>> Le 8 janv. 09 à 17:17, Michael D. Ivey a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > On Jan 8, 2009, at 10:04 AM, Jim Freeze wrote:
> >>> >> I think specifically the problem here (and the real reason this
> >>> >> should
> >>> >> not be done) is that a crawler (using get requests) can actually
> >>> >> delete an object.
> >>> >> To me, this is the real danger and the real issue and the reason for
> >>> >> avoiding this type of web coding. Not because "it's evil", or "it
> >>> >> will
> >>> >> make the web unhappy" or "Matt won't be my friend". ;-)
> >>> >
> >>> > That's why it's evil and that's why it makes the web unhappy. They're
> >>> > the same thing.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Nicolas Cavigneaux
> >>> http://www.bounga.org
> >>> http://www.cavigneaux.net
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"merb" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
