IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Call for Adoption: SEARCH method

James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Thu, 19 November 2020 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6E63A0147 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 06:29:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.747
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.747 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pSwVHzGStVhM for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 06:29:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E4593A0039 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 06:28:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1kfksl-0008WA-TA for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 14:25:56 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 14:25:55 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1kfksl-0008WA-TA@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1kfksk-0008VO-Hg for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 14:25:54 +0000
Received: from mail-lf1-x12e.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1kfksg-0000Cs-Bi for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 14:25:54 +0000
Received: by mail-lf1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id 74so8498662lfo.5 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 06:25:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cO/R+0BKCDBNEvgpm9ZveLXpWWbzN0w9/0UU5clR69c=; b=HeBg9ZYQyE7NI+V6kBlG/OzsPAGVItIBjyIbcVWaWsww3baBSrXaoGzGTg3IKBKUrF pUcvNtAdDWyJCRzNkGqQbTx2tjypjV6MQLPzmfMtmGAojw8Rg+QOS1erJtJnkx2jcqM9 o2K6WVO8v0BvE9R2Ad1iAZbfATjXUAQwr+tiEyYNV7SyjUZOmwpw13e9Tfmr2uv6fdbu Ko/VVmSctz1qco93G5FcMalylWANxbsx0EDZ4P+yk0NRmgJL4z31uhuEufq62U1fxU1B kuUMJ5PDBGjOZ7XarjSXSx7db6gvbY2o4Hlt3ulA2oITUqgSKKAYw07A4hNTPqD4GWSF fHrA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cO/R+0BKCDBNEvgpm9ZveLXpWWbzN0w9/0UU5clR69c=; b=G5lHTdJKxNc2pFIPGk9ooXCWLHGUdI7B2lxOl0yfKvDFpK9ccMShoF4XAcTzsX2DfM GRvFXybwwf5S0Vq/Y2ZpsWDSbYmlhOmMf5+yjl6i3yFoz4vGgTrOR9uO1aNLr5wBSpFE 3/3AJB8e4R049zsAJFDGsngw87acRSC28nUwoeBfFFd5B7fk3n1KNP4ZlJ6npZ7UW+6M M7b/S3/nZ5PsMvtzvNUPRX90+tqCqBz5Nw8nUdmc2bErw/ikfJhN3Re2UGGhwgolniYk DXlr18a3DsrhGLqa4XnBk1uPpMdMz3VJhpKGva1l4aO+UgA1ozlDdZHOeyGTsf70Byu5 InLA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533gvcK0wgkK5O13E5nF+akERCCqxNNZirXLH1Unu+tLVBNrqMQp XaVE1O+QvGdXcyUBr6Zt8dctRNV/YM71AnniFUMHpuEQnw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxoWX9stqmcn8plED1iy8yNbZRjL7u9e4rN/seRDgn7ds7dyqYb8g/WW7Vl39dnVC4BsZ45v2iDaeeH/5EshP4=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:915e:: with SMTP id y30mr6586999lfj.266.1605795938766; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 06:25:38 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F0556EC2-D5AD-47FF-A780-15949F57A911@mnot.net> <5C86F8CE-3075-48C7-BFA0-B7E202225829@acm.org> <CABP7RbeA8mj=sQhRFx6cUnnGES9=fogy=94nWwWkuQDj2NBNfA@mail.gmail.com> <00838246-acb5-6ad3-5864-9cce8521d9ca@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <00838246-acb5-6ad3-5864-9cce8521d9ca@gmx.de>
From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 06:25:25 -0800
Message-ID: <CABP7Rbd95+MDtbtV-zp7r0cWYt46_dfzC9j0ZczxMOAQMo6hyg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000083184e05b4768099"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::12e; envelope-from=jasnell@gmail.com; helo=mail-lf1-x12e.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1kfksg-0000Cs-Bi c279c59eac448a140ee24786202af529
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Call for Adoption: SEARCH method
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CABP7Rbd95+MDtbtV-zp7r0cWYt46_dfzC9j0ZczxMOAQMo6hyg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/38251
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Heh, I think we had a similar discussion before when we first started
writing this up if memory serves me correctly ;) ... My view of it should
definitely not limit anyone else's here, or hold up the WG adopting the
draft ;)

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 20:50 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:

> .
> >
> >
> > To be clear, this is not intended as a safe, idempotent equivalent to
> > POST. It is intended specifically to cover search/query operations which
> > are often ambiguously represented as GET or POST. I'm not quite sure
> > what a safe idempotent equivalent to POST would even be, but this is not
> > it.
> > ...
>
> FWIW, I disagree with that. Ignore the method name for a moment, and
> what's left is a retrieval operation similar to GET which additionally
> takes the request payload into account.
>
> > ...
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email