Re: PaceErrVerb

[Ken MacLeod <ken@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Walter Underwood <wunder@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> First: GET, POST, and URL parameters are widely-understood
> techniques.  They have been adequate for thousands of
> applications. CGI is good enough for Atom. Using new methods or new
> headers makes it harder for implementors. If we can't make Atom work
> with CGI, it is our fault, not HTTP's.

You'll probably want to use some other use-case than CGI because CGIs
are used for most Atom API implementations and examples in various
environments, and they're working fine.  The CGI protocol certainly
supports HTTP methods, headers, and status codes (existing or new),
even if there are specific known issues with the occasional server or
library implementation.

The use of HTTP-as-specified has been discussed at length and the best
place for researching or registering known issues is in the curiously
named wiki page CarrotVsOrange[1].

  -- Ken

PS.  I'm not particularly in favor of automated error reporting, but
certainly not because it might involve a new HTTP method.

[1] http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/CarrotVsOrange