atom feed41 messages in org.tigris.restlet.discussRE: HEAD not well supported?
FromSent OnAttachments
Sean LandisOct 1, 2007 12:27 pm 
Sean LandisOct 3, 2007 9:36 am 
John D. MitchellOct 3, 2007 9:41 am 
Sean LandisOct 3, 2007 11:39 am 
Adam TaftOct 3, 2007 1:06 pm 
Rob HeittmanOct 3, 2007 1:15 pm 
Adam TaftOct 3, 2007 1:25 pm 
Erik HetznerOct 3, 2007 2:24 pm 
Sean LandisOct 3, 2007 3:03 pm 
Erik HetznerOct 3, 2007 3:58 pm 
Sean LandisOct 3, 2007 4:37 pm 
Aron RobertsOct 3, 2007 5:26 pm 
Adam TaftOct 3, 2007 7:21 pm 
Aron RobertsOct 3, 2007 7:38 pm 
Erik HetznerOct 3, 2007 10:55 pm 
Aron RobertsOct 4, 2007 12:03 pm 
Adam TaftOct 4, 2007 2:02 pm 
Erik HetznerOct 4, 2007 10:27 pm 
Sean LandisOct 5, 2007 12:42 pm 
Jerome LouvelOct 6, 2007 9:40 am 
Erik HetznerOct 6, 2007 11:23 am 
Sean LandisOct 8, 2007 10:34 am 
Erik HetznerOct 9, 2007 9:48 am 
Jerome LouvelOct 9, 2007 1:28 pm 
Erik HetznerOct 9, 2007 4:45 pm 
Sean LandisOct 10, 2007 7:45 am 
Chuck HinsonOct 10, 2007 4:25 pm 
Jerome LouvelOct 11, 2007 1:24 am 
Sean LandisOct 11, 2007 12:31 pm 
Jerome LouvelOct 11, 2007 1:12 pm 
Chuck HinsonOct 11, 2007 8:29 pm 
Tim PeierlsOct 12, 2007 6:46 am 
Kyrre KristiansenOct 12, 2007 8:04 am 
Sean LandisOct 12, 2007 12:41 pm 
Michael TerringtonOct 13, 2007 4:24 pm 
Jerome LouvelOct 16, 2007 2:32 pm 
Sean LandisOct 18, 2007 11:16 am 
Jerome LouvelOct 18, 2007 11:41 am 
Sumit LohiaOct 18, 2007 12:57 pm 
Jerome LouvelOct 19, 2007 12:37 am 
Jerome LouvelNov 6, 2007 3:16 pm 
Subject:RE: HEAD not well supported?
From:Jerome Louvel (cont@noelios.com)
Date:Oct 9, 2007 1:28:56 pm
List:org.tigris.restlet.discuss

Hi all,

At the lower API level, we don't differentiate the HEAD from the GET methods, see the org.restlet.Uniform class and subclasses like Restlet.

However, at the higher API levels, at the org.restlet.resource.Resource level especially, we do go further by adding implicit support for content negotiation, conditional methods, HEAD implementation based on GET, etc.

If you want to gain full control, you can always build Restlet/Filter subclasses.

However, I agree with the fact that the Resource.handleGet/handleHead methods are a bit confusing, that's why we'll move them to the Finder class in 1.1.

Best regards, Jerome

-----Message d'origine----- De : Erik Hetzner [mailto:erik@ucop.edu] Envoyé : mardi 9 octobre 2007 18:49 À : disc@restlet.tigris.org Objet : Re: HEAD not well supported?

At Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:35:00 +0000 (UTC), Sean Landis <sean@gmail.com> wrote:

Regarding my previous comments regarding a test using curl; it appears curl is hung up on the fact that content length has a value and there is no entity. I did determine that Restlet does remove the content. Sorry for being misleading on that point.

It does appear that curl is wrong here. I have filed a bug report at <http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1810 273&group_id=976&atid=100976>

You can obtain correct behavior by using the -I/--head option instead of -X HEAD, which is good to know.

I'd say that Restlet meets the requirements of the spec and that's good. Although I still think it would be better to leverage Uniform entirely and it seems awkward to me that HEAD is an exception.

My understanding of REST is that HEAD is part of the uniform interface and therefore should be supported in the same way, and to the same extent as the rest of the HTTP methods. I was very surprised when HEAD did not conform to the programming model in place for the uniform interface and I suspect others would be too.

I don’t understand what you mean here by uniform interface. Uniform interface in REST refer to inter-application semantics, not intra-application. And it doesn’t, to my understanding, mean that HEAD & GET must have identical semantics, rather that the semantics of a GET or HEAD request be the same for all resources. Am I misunderstanding you here?

best, Erik Hetzner ;; Erik Hetzner, California Digital Library ;; gnupg key id: 1024D/01DB07E3