That interpretation of GET in the RFC may not be correct, and is certainly not used in practice. If it was then hitting a URL with GET would always result in the same response. That not true of any site with personalization, data shown from a session, date/time text on the page, even a hit counter. There just aren't very many HTTP resources in the world that would qualify for that interpretation. And if it means only server-side state and not what is returned then it is still rarely the case, even logging the request would violate that rule.

-David


On Jan 19, 2009, at 8:25 PM, Raj Saini wrote:

In HTTP protocol GET method is considered idempotent that is multiple calls to the same resource should result in the same result. In Contrast POST method is no idempotent and therefore if a URL with POST method is refreshed browsers will through a warning message.

Therefore, we should use GET method for the safe operations such as fetching a list of records based on input parameters and POST for transaction which can change the state of application for example inserting a record in database.

Thanks,

Raj

Adrian Crum wrote:
Most browsers have a warning popup window that tells the user that a screen refresh will result in reposting data. Maybe you could supplement that with a similar warning on the web page itself.

-Adrian


--- On Mon, 1/19/09, Rees Watkins <gat.of...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:


From: Rees Watkins <gat.of...@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: F5 ( refresh of browser ) causes another item to be added to the cart
To: user@ofbiz.apache.org
Date: Monday, January 19, 2009, 11:13 AM
Hi

I have customised ofbiz for the travel industry. I do not
hold any
product. All product sold is reserved and booked on a 3rd
party site.
Generally cancellation has heavy penalties. In the even a
customer buys
an additional item by mistake one of the parties will lose
50 - 100% on
a refund. I would like to customise my ofbiz to prevent
items been
added on refresh. Does anyone have any suggestion or
comments on how
best to do this?

Thanks
Rees







Reply via email to