[Catalyst] Re: REST - like uri design for CRUD

[Zbigniew Lukasiak]

On Jan 22, 2008 1:30 AM, Aristotle Pagaltzis <pagaltzis at gmx.de> wrote:
> * Zbigniew Lukasiak <zzbbyy at gmail.com> [2008-01-21 07:40]:
> > While we are at that - I do understand the need to divide the
> > operations into the 'indempotent' and 'non-indempotent' classes
> > (because of caching and predictive link loading) - but what is
> > really the practical argument for having two more classes (PUT
> > and DELETE)?
>
> I don't understand this question. It sounds like you have some
> confusion about several distinct things and that you don't
> actually understand what idempotence is. Can you try to explain
> a bit more what you are trying to ask? Are you just asking why
> there are more verbs than GET and POST? Are you asking about why
> it's important to categorise verbs as non-/safe in addition to
> non-/idempotent? Is it something all together different?

The first one.  Why you need to split the class of non-idempotent
operations into three more categories (POST, PUT and DELETE).

-- 
Zbigniew Lukasiak
http://brudnopis.blogspot.com/