Re: Summary of STATUS100 issue
rlgray@raleigh.ibm.com
Thu, 17 Jul 1997 15:59:09 EST
** Reply to note from koen@win.tue.nl (Koen Holtman) Thu, 10 Jul 1997 21:45:24 +0200 (MET DST)
>
[...]
>
> Urgl. I get the feeling that 100 is taking far too much of our scarce
> time, given that it is in no way central to basic HTTP operation. I
> also have the feeling that is taking so much time because it had loads
> of *unnecessary complexity* from the start.
>
> I think we are trying to untangle a knot which should be cut instead.
>
> I move that we either simplify the thing, or remove it from the spec
> entirely. We already know that 100 processing is a pain to implement
> in servers and clients, and I think it is time to question whether we
> cannot achieve the same goals in a much simpler way.
>
I agree. The KISS principle applies.
[...]
>
> To meet (1) above, we could define a new method by which the client
> can ask the server if an X request with the following headers would be
> allowed. Such a request could look like:
>
> ASK-IF-ALLOWED /a/page HTTP/1.1
> Is-method-allowed: PUT
> Authorization: ......
> etc.
>
>
> I don't think things need to be more complicated than that.
Why not OPTIONS?
>
> Koen.
>
>
Richard L. Gray
chocolate - the One True food group