Re: Seiwald Q & A -- "GET for EDIT" cookies

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Previous message: Christopher Seiwald: "Re: Seiwald Q & A -- "GET for EDIT" cookies -- final volley"

>    I don't have a problem with this, except that we have HTTP PUT, and the
> versioning stuff must work with it (to my mind, PUT is un-useful without
> versioning, but that is (perhaps) only my problem). If we move all the
> versioning stuff into a special content-type that must be processed,
> versioning updates will be implemented differently from non-versioning
> updates. This will reduce the ability of versioning to work with legacy
> authoring environments, and _require_ special work for versioning to be
> supported at all.

I don't think there are any legacy authoring environments that use PUT
without also using a bunch of non-standard stuff around it.

Larry

• Previous message: Christopher Seiwald: "Re: Seiwald Q & A -- "GET for EDIT" cookies -- final volley"