On Oct 17, 2006, at 6:23 AM, Mark Baker wrote:
On 10/16/06, Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 14, 2006, at 15:20, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 14:18:56 +0200, Robin Berjon
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And you guarantee interoperability how?
>
> It's not the job of the XMLHttpRequest specification to guarantee
> interoperability on HTTP level features, imho. Anyway, as
> indicated, this is likely to be tested in the testsuite.
If you can't guarantee that at least a core set of methods will work,
the API is simply useless.
I disagree.
Common practice with HTTP is what declares what methods are in use at
any given time. As an API to HTTP - which provides portability, not
interoperability -
I'm not sure what distinction you are trying to draw. HTTP definitely
does provide interoperability - that is why it is a standards track
IETF RFC. The IETF requires interoperable implementations of a
specification for it to advance along the standards track. It even
mandates a minimal set of methods that servers MUST support, GET and
HEAD.
XHR doesn't need to say anything about that.
A minimal set should definitely be stated, otherwise the API spec
doesn't guarantee enough to do anything useful and code will
inevitably depend on implementation conventions. An implementation
that did not support, say, "GET" or "POST" but only did "HEAD" would
be useless. It is simply a question of what the minimum set should
be. I think GET, POST, PUT, DELETE and HEAD is a reasonable choice.
Regards,
Maciej
