I think I can distill this conversation down to one point... On 7/30/07, Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Makes sense but isn't supported? A bit of a contradiction in terms > > > there surely? Either it makes sense (and therefore should be > > > supported) or it doesn't make sense and therefore isn't supported. > > > > It *is* supported, it just isn't implemented. > > That really doesn't make sense. If I am a consumer I want to know > what the resource can do. Claiming that it "supports" something means > that it "does" something. Its a strange definition of support that > says "X supports DELETE" and when someone calls DELETE it says that it > can't complete that request.
That's only because "supports" is defined rather loosely, or at least not in a way that makes it easy to distinguish which part of it is interface and which is implementation. If a given resource can't be deleted, then the server need only return a 405 response when requested to delete it. So it "makes sense" in the sense that the meaning of a "DELETE http://example.org/some-trade"; message is uniform and understood by all parties. That doesn't mean every resource can be deleted though, which is part of the reason why HTTP defines the 405 status code. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com
