Re: draft-holtman-http-safe-00.txt
Koen Holtman (koen@win.tue.nl)
Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:09:37 +0200 (MET DST)
Gavin Nicol:
>
[Koen:]
>> b) which are (sometimes) used to submit data in a charset other
>> than ISO-8859-1.
>>
>> Case b) will be the increasingly common; web internationalization [2]
>> makes it necessary to use the POST method for form submission.
>
>The I18N draft does not make POST use mandatory at all.
True, and I did not mean to imply it did. If I understand the messages in
this thread correctly, the I18N draft make the uses of _method bodies_
necessary, and in current envirionents, that means using POST.
> A Safe header
>could equally well be used to indicate that a GET-with-body result
>can be cached/reused.
The existing Cache-Control header can already be used to indicate
cache/reuse for a GET-WITH-BODY.
And if a new GET-WITH-BODY is defined, one would not need the Safe header
anymore, one could simply define GET-WITH-BODY as always safe. However,
some HTML form hacks would be needed to provide the same level of downwards
compatibility with existing browsers that Safe can provide, for example
<form action="..." method=post preferred_method=get-with-body>
....
</form>.
So it boils down to cruft in HTTP vs. cruft in HTML.
Koen.