Hacker News Reader

Comment by jared314 | Hacker News Reader

Now, if web browser would support custom HTTP verbs, you could map application actions to http verbs and start removing the years of work-arounds that used GET and POST to tunnel what you really wanted.

View on HN

I think that if this was done, there'd be a surge of blog posts not long after telling people to just use the original verbs, because everything about them - caching, idempotence, safeness, etc. - is a known quantity and doesn't change based on different interpretations of the same verb. Not to mention ridiculously confusing APIs.

    TWEET /
    GOOGLE /internet/?query=...
    LIKE /friend/jimmy
    GETPUTPOSTDELETE /i-am-too-lazy-to-use-separate-verbs

POST https://api.twitter.com/1.1/statuses/retweet/:id.json

POST https://www.googleapis.com/youtube/v3/videos/rate?id=1234...

APIs are already confusing for anything beyond CRUD operations.

That has all the disadvantages of using POST for everything, with the added disadvantage of requiring developers to read more documentation. Are there any advantages?

Nobody uses POSTs for everything. Right now we have an excellent GET/POST split.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that there are a gazillion of enterprise firewalls, gateways etc that will only let GET/POST thru.

Only if you let them see your traffic. What's the problem with going SSL-only? Are there really firewalls/gateways that don't let HTTPS traffic through?

Many enterprise proxies provide certificates for the clients machines so they can process HTTPS as well.

Bluecoat is an example of a very common transparent proxy that handles SSL traffic.

s/process/MITM/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com