Re: Posted PaceURINomenclature

On Aug 18, 2006, at 2:42 PM, Kyle Marvin wrote:

> On 8/18/06, Bill de hÓra <bill-h1s9WT/giYOsTnJN9+BGXg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I believe GET on the edit URI is assured to be undefined.
>
> The PACE says "The Edit URI may respond to GET requests, but client
> software MUST NOT rely on this"
>
> How about "unreliable" instead of "undefined"?  :)

Right, but if we adopt PaceOnlyMemberURI, then this is no longer  
true, right?  It is *expected* to respond to GET.

 -Tim