[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Handling unknown elements in an entry

To: Dare Obasanjo <kpako@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Handling unknown elements in an entry
From: Robert Sayre <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 12:39:03 -0500
Cc: Joe Gregorio <joe.gregorio@xxxxxxxxx>, David M Johnson <Davidm.Johnson@xxxxxxx>, Atom Protocol <atom-protocol@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-protocol/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-protocol.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-protocol-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <>
Reply-to: mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-atom-protocol@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103)

Dare Obasanjo wrote:

HTTP works exactly this way. I can send If-None-Match or If-Modified-Since and if the server doesn't support them they are ignored. It seems you are suggesting that HTTP servers are either supposed to (a) error or (b) store these header values and return them even though they do nothing with them.

No, I'm talking about the body of a PUT request. Are you discussing metadata elements (e.g. atom:category) and HTTP headers interchangeably? If so, I get it.

Anyway, I think the draft should define which aspects of the request MUST be stored by the server.

Robert Sayre

[0] http://bitworking.org/projects/atom/atomapi/draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-03.html#constraints

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Handling unknown elements in an entry
  - From: David Powell

References:
- Re: Handling unknown elements in an entry
  - From: Dare Obasanjo

Prev by Date: PaceAuthentication (Re: Protocol Authentication)
Next by Date: Re: Handling unknown elements in an entry
Previous by thread: Re: Handling unknown elements in an entry
Next by thread: Re: Handling unknown elements in an entry
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread