ucapi-discuss at Yahoo! Groups

Re: RESTLog specification: Forcing GET Content-Type

Joe Gregorio — Sat, 07 Jun 2003 02:32:03 GMT

... Ok, now I understand. That could best be described as bug, the code where I determine the mime-type doesn't know the verb, GET, PUT, POST, etc. It just

Re: RESTLog specification: Forcing GET Content-Type

Giulio Piancastelli — Sat, 07 Jun 2003 00:05:05 GMT

... Yes, it is, as also Simon pointed out correctly. But, issuing the following HTTP request to your weblog on bitworking.org: GET /news/PyTextileAndBulu

Re: RESTLog specification: Forcing GET Content-Type

Joe Gregorio — Fri, 06 Jun 2003 19:35:26 GMT

... It is actually the Accept: header that drives content negotiation on a GET. The Content-Type: header is used on the PUT and POST. The ?xml is designed to

Re: RESTLog specification: Forcing GET Content-Type

Simon Fell — Fri, 06 Jun 2003 18:16:12 GMT

perhaps its just a typo, but a conneg request should sent an Accept: header to indicate the acceptable response types, not a content-type. On the otherhand, i

RESTLog specification: Forcing GET Content-Type

Giulio Piancastelli — Fri, 06 Jun 2003 17:43:48 GMT

Hi all. In the RESTLog interface specification I did read: "Type is just a shorthand for the mime-type of that transaction. Normally selecting the mime type is

Re: Web Services, Weblogs and the Future.

Giulio Piancastelli — Tue, 03 Jun 2003 07:57:31 GMT

... Personally, I'd not go on the XML-RPC path, especially if the so-called Weblog API (more on names in a few paragraphs) is something we want to be widely

Re: Web Services, Weblogs and the Future.

DJ Adams — Mon, 02 Jun 2003 16:20:54 GMT

... Things wax and wane. Mailing list traffic and energy especially. Don't blame yourself :-) ... Depending on the questionee's leaning, this question answers

Web Services, Weblogs and the Future.

tappnel — Mon, 02 Jun 2003 15:46:27 GMT

This list has been far too quiet and that is mostly my fault. The topic of Weblog API has been quite a topic of discussion that I've chimed in on through my

Re: RESTLog Simon & Joe again..

Giulio Piancastelli — Wed, 09 Apr 2003 23:44:06 GMT

... So, since it is not required to have a valid RSS item fragment, I have removed the fake element from my client implementation, accordingly to the

Re: Running Joe's RESTLog server under IIS 5.0... any hint?

Giulio Piancastelli — Wed, 09 Apr 2003 22:17:24 GMT

... On the other hand, I managed to have Bulu (let's call things with their proper names ;)) up and running under Windows 95 against Apache 1.3.20. I got a

Re: RESTLog Simon & Joe again..

Joe Gregorio — Wed, 09 Apr 2003 17:09:26 GMT

... I updated the CommentAPI recently but forgot to add the same verbage to the RESTLog spec. That is: The contents of the 'item' element are guided by the

Re: Running Joe's RESTLog server under IIS 5.0... any hint?

Simon Fell — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 02:16:44 GMT

... This sounds like the behavior i was seeing on Apache2/W2k, i can see the python exe process start up, but it never goes away, and i never get a response

Re: Running Joe's RESTLog server under IIS 5.0... any hint?

Giulio Piancastelli — Mon, 07 Apr 2003 21:23:16 GMT

... Yes. But I also tried using HttpClient with setHttp11(false) in order to use HTTP/1.0 and avoid the 100 Continue response (since HTTP 1.0 did not define

Re: RESTLog Simon & Joe again..

Bill Kearney — Mon, 07 Apr 2003 18:23:59 GMT

... In RSS-1.0 the rdf:about on an is for the ITEM itself. The element CAN be EITHER that same link (as a permalink) or as a single link to some

Re: Running Joe's RESTLog server under IIS 5.0... any hint?

Simon Fell — Mon, 07 Apr 2003 18:02:17 GMT

... IIS typically will send a 100 Continue in response to a HTTP/1.1 request. This shouldn't cause any problems, its a manditory part of the HTTP/1.1 spec. I