Re: PaceServiceError GET vs. POST (was Re: AtomPubIssuesList)

[Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@xxxxxx>]

Robert Sayre wrote:

> > > There is a difference in the intent. The intent of GET is getting 
> > > content. If a server chooses to log that, that's an implementation 
> > > detail.
> > >   
>
> My thinking was that the server should not have to disclose the status 
> of the request. 204 means the request contained all required headers and 
> the URI was valid.

I'm not sure what this has to do with GET vs ERR or POST?

> By using a POST with 202, we would also be in violation of a SHOULD 
> level requirement (safeness of GET is also a SHOULD), since there 
> shouldn't be response content at all.

Why that?

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#status.202>:

"The request has been accepted for processing, but the processing has 
not been completed. The request might or might not eventually be acted 
upon, as it might be disallowed when processing actually takes place. 
There is no facility for re-sending a status code from an asynchronous 
operation such as this.

The 202 response is intentionally non-committal. Its purpose is to allow 
a server to accept a request for some other process (perhaps a 
batch-oriented process that is only run once per day) without requiring 
that the user agent's connection to the server persist until the process 
is completed. The entity returned with this response SHOULD include an 
indication of the request's current status and either a pointer to a 
status monitor or some estimate of when the user can expect the request 
to be fulfilled."

Best regards, Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760