--- In [email protected], "Marc de Graauw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[snip] > > I can see how that leads to PUT being idempotent, but I cannot see why this > would make POST necessarily non-idempotent.
(wanders over to [service-orientated-architecture] from [rest- discuss]) As I understand it, Marc is correct. PUT is required to be idempotent by RFC2616. POST simply has no requirement. It might be, it might not be - that's up to the server. The UA cannot rely on any behavioural expectation. Therefore, unless the server 'makes a promise' by providing support for some protocol layered on top of HTTP (such as AtomPub) - all bets are off. Alan Dean http://thoughtpad.net/alan-dean http://simplewebservices.org
