Re: OPTIONS method

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: David W. Morris: "Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?"
• Previous message: Scott Lawrence: "Re: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?"
• In reply to: Josh Cohen: "OPTIONS method"
• Next in thread: Josh: "Re: OPTIONS method"
• Reply: Josh: "Re: OPTIONS method"

>Is there a header that can be passed with an OPTIONS method request
>to probe for protocol support of a feature?
>
>OPTIONS * HTTP/1.1
>query: foobar 

Not yet.  It would be a good project to come up with a complete definition
of OPTIONS (the existing one is only a skeleton for future extension)
including both the request and the response format.  I wouldn't do it
as a header field, though.  There is a good reason why requests can
contain bodies, and those bodies have a type, encoding, etc.

....Roy

• Next message: David W. Morris: "Re: ISSUE: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST requests?"
• Previous message: Scott Lawrence: "Re: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?"
• In reply to: Josh Cohen: "OPTIONS method"
• Next in thread: Josh: "Re: OPTIONS method"
• Reply: Josh: "Re: OPTIONS method"