RE: Is <content> required on a POST?

["Danny Ayers" <danny666@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Background: I am starting to look at building up test suites for both
> clients and servers.  The goal is to maximize interoperability by making
> as much as possible predictable.

Good man!

> Clearly, I am making a number of assumptions.  Lets get them out on the
> table and examine them.  Here's the ones that I am aware of:
>
> 1) I am presuming that checking for a missing element does not require
> much more than an an "if" check on the server.
>
> 2) The content element is important enough to warrant such a check.
>
> 3) The existence of a standalone test suite that implementors can use to
> self-test is sufficient to make voluntary compliance with requirements
> such as these easy enough to achieve.
>
> There.  That should be enough to start a discussion.  Before wandering
> off into other elements and attributes, let's settle this one question
> first: is <content> required on a POST?

Another assumption here would seem to be that there will be a single kind of
receiver - all URIs will behave the same (though according to the API spec,
they may only have a subset of the capabilities). I don't have a problem
with this, but I'd be grateful if the assumptions at this level were made
explicit somewhere - are they already, lurking on the Wiki?
Or would it make more sense to work from a 'typical' introspection file?

Cheers,
Danny.