From 260cd00c1ddfd95606d7217830e284584feb509a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Martin Thomson Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 15:00:56 +1000 Subject: [PATCH] typo Separately, I'm having trouble connecting this final sentence to the text that precedes it. I think that the point is that including a body on GET is unwise because it might cause explosions. A point about side effects needs far more exposition, especially since GET is defined to be free from overt side effects (safe, idempotent, and all that business). --- draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis.md b/draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis.md index b57319d1e..f6c816fec 100644 --- a/draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis.md +++ b/draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis.md @@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ implementations can and do retry HTTP GET requests that fail. Finally, note that while HTTP allows GET requests to have a body syntactically, this is done only to allow parsers to be generic; as per {{!RFC7231}}, Section 4.3.1, a body on a GET has no meaning, and will be either ignored or rejected by generic HTTP software. As a result, applications that use -HTTP SHOULD NOT define GET to have any sde effects upon their resources. +HTTP SHOULD NOT define GET to have any side effects upon their resources.