* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

Ticket #112 (closed editorial: fixed)

Opened 8 years ago

Last modified 5 years ago

PUT - "store under" vs "store at"

Reported by: julian.reschke@gmx.de Owned by: julian.reschke@gmx.de
Priority: Milestone: 03
Component: p2-semantics Severity: Active WG Document
Keywords: Cc:
Origin: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2008AprJun/0160.html


8.6.  PUT
    The PUT method requests that the enclosed entity be stored under the
    supplied Request-URI.

Several people thought "under" implies "at a subpath of the Request-URI". To reduce confusion, this should be changed from "under" to "at".

Change History

comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@gmx.de

  • Owner set to julian.reschke@gmx.de

comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@gmx.de

  • Status changed from new to closed
  • Resolution set to fixed

Fixed in [241]:

Resolve #112: replace "to be stored under the supplied Request-URI" by "... at ....". (closes #112).

comment:3 Changed 5 years ago by fielding@gbiv.com

From [1158]:

Replaced the general prohibition on unrecognized Content-* header fields with a specific prohibition of Content-Range (the only field for which it is an actual problem) and a general requirement regarding checking for consistency. Unfortunately, this required rewriting the entire section on PUT to get rid of the misconceptions about storing resources and reflect how PUT is actually implemented in practice.

Addresses #79, #102, #103, #104, #112, #180, #231, and #267

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.