4 ms·
The Web Linking RFC [1] uses it to do discovery. The HEAD is mainly used to get ahold of the "Link" response header. > HEAD / HTTP/1.1 < 204 no content
by pfraze 13y ago
The Web Linking RFC [1] uses it to do discovery. The HEAD is mainly used to get ahold of the "Link" response header.
> HEAD / HTTP/1.1
< 204 no content
< Link: <foobar.com/>; rel="self service"; title="Foobar!",
<foobar.com/users>; rel="collection"; id="users"
> HEAD /users HTTP/1.1
< 204 no content
< Link: <foobar.com/>; rel="up service"; title="Foobar!",
<foobar.com/users>; rel="self collection"; id="users"
<foobar.com/users/bob>; rel="item"; id="bob"
> GET /bob HTTP/1.1
...
GET can't support that process, so that's just one reason why I'm against ditching the extra verbs.
1 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988
- lmz 13y agoWhy can't GET support that process? You'd have the extra bytes of the content, but there's nothing stopping the server sending the Link header in response to a GET request.
- pfraze 13y agoIt's already a pretty chatty protocol; if you can support the HEAD request, why not do so and save the bandwidth?