GET:
GET /blog/?name1=value1&name2=value2 HTTP/1.1
Host: website.com
POST:
POST /blog/ HTTP/1.1
Host: website.com
name1=value1&name2=value2
I don't see why there should be a difference.
GET is supposed to be used for bookmark-able pages or repeatable searches; so the URL stores the query data so it can be used repeatedly by the browser.
POST, on the other hand, is for one-time requests containing sensitive information or information that might be too long for a query string. The data isn't supposed to be saved like in a GET request, so it is stored in the body.
You might also want to see this SO answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/198473/436524
It's a result of how form submission is defined for HTML forms. It has nothing to do with HTTP itself.
In an HTTP GET request, parameters are sent as a query string:
http://example.com/page?parameter=value&also=another
In an HTTP POST request, the parameters are not sent along with the URI.
Where are the values? In the request header? In the request body? What does it look like?
The values are sent in the request body, in the format that the content type specifies.
Usually the content type is application/x-www-form-urlencoded, so the request body uses the same format as the query string:
parameter=value&also=another
When you use a file upload in the form, you use the multipart/form-data encoding instead, which has a different format. It's more complicated, but you usually don't need to care what it looks like, so I won't show an example, but it can be good to know that it exists.
The content is put after the HTTP headers. The format of an HTTP POST is to have the HTTP headers, followed by a blank line, followed by the request body. The POST variables are stored as key-value pairs in the body.
You can see this in the raw content of an HTTP Post, shown below:
POST /path/script.cgi HTTP/1.0
From: frog#jmarshall.com
User-Agent: HTTPTool/1.0
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Content-Length: 32
home=Cosby&favorite+flavor=flies
You can see this using a tool like Fiddler, which you can use to watch the raw HTTP request and response payloads being sent across the wire.
Short answer: in POST requests, values are sent in the "body" of the request. With web-forms they are most likely sent with a media type of application/x-www-form-urlencoded or multipart/form-data. Programming languages or frameworks which have been designed to handle web-requests usually do "The Right Thing™" with such requests and provide you with easy access to the readily decoded values (like $_REQUEST or $_POST in PHP, or cgi.FieldStorage(), flask.request.form in Python).
Now let's digress a bit, which may help understand the difference ;)
The difference between GET and POST requests are largely semantic. They are also "used" differently, which explains the difference in how values are passed.
GET (relevant RFC section)
When executing a GET request, you ask the server for one, or a set of entities. To allow the client to filter the result, it can use the so called "query string" of the URL. The query string is the part after the ?. This is part of the URI syntax.
So, from the point of view of your application code (the part which receives the request), you will need to inspect the URI query part to gain access to these values.
Note that the keys and values are part of the URI. Browsers may impose a limit on URI length. The HTTP standard states that there is no limit. But at the time of this writing, most browsers do limit the URIs (I don't have specific values). GET requests should never be used to submit new information to the server. Especially not larger documents. That's where you should use POST or PUT.
POST (relevant RFC section)
When executing a POST request, the client is actually submitting a new document to the remote host. So, a query string does not (semantically) make sense. Which is why you don't have access to them in your application code.
POST is a little bit more complex (and way more flexible):
When receiving a POST request, you should always expect a "payload", or, in HTTP terms: a message body. The message body in itself is pretty useless, as there is no standard (as far as I can tell. Maybe application/octet-stream?) format. The body format is defined by the Content-Type header. When using a HTML FORM element with method="POST", this is usually application/x-www-form-urlencoded. Another very common type is multipart/form-data if you use file uploads. But it could be anything, ranging from text/plain, over application/json or even a custom application/octet-stream.
In any case, if a POST request is made with a Content-Type which cannot be handled by the application, it should return a 415 status-code.
Most programming languages (and/or web-frameworks) offer a way to de/encode the message body from/to the most common types (like application/x-www-form-urlencoded, multipart/form-data or application/json). So that's easy. Custom types require potentially a bit more work.
Using a standard HTML form encoded document as example, the application should perform the following steps:
Read the Content-Type field
If the value is not one of the supported media-types, then return a response with a 415 status code
otherwise, decode the values from the message body.
Again, languages like PHP, or web-frameworks for other popular languages will probably handle this for you. The exception to this is the 415 error. No framework can predict which content-types your application chooses to support and/or not support. This is up to you.
PUT (relevant RFC section)
A PUT request is pretty much handled in the exact same way as a POST request. The big difference is that a POST request is supposed to let the server decide how to (and if at all) create a new resource. Historically (from the now obsolete RFC2616 it was to create a new resource as a "subordinate" (child) of the URI where the request was sent to).
A PUT request in contrast is supposed to "deposit" a resource exactly at that URI, and with exactly that content. No more, no less. The idea is that the client is responsible to craft the complete resource before "PUTting" it. The server should accept it as-is on the given URL.
As a consequence, a POST request is usually not used to replace an existing resource. A PUT request can do both create and replace.
Side-Note
There are also "path parameters" which can be used to send additional data to the remote, but they are so uncommon, that I won't go into too much detail here. But, for reference, here is an excerpt from the RFC:
Aside from dot-segments in hierarchical paths, a path segment is considered
opaque by the generic syntax. URI producing applications often use the
reserved characters allowed in a segment to delimit scheme-specific or
dereference-handler-specific subcomponents. For example, the semicolon (";")
and equals ("=") reserved characters are often used to delimit parameters and
parameter values applicable to that segment. The comma (",") reserved
character is often used for similar purposes. For example, one URI producer
might use a segment such as "name;v=1.1" to indicate a reference to version
1.1 of "name", whereas another might use a segment such as "name,1.1" to
indicate the same. Parameter types may be defined by scheme-specific
semantics, but in most cases the syntax of a parameter is specific
to the implementation of the URIs dereferencing algorithm.
You cannot type it directly on the browser URL bar.
You can see how POST data is sent on the Internet with Live HTTP Headers for example.
Result will be something like that
http://127.0.0.1/pass.php
POST /pass.php HTTP/1.1
Host: 127.0.0.1
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:18.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/18.0
Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8
Accept-Language: en-US,en;q=0.5
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
DNT: 1
Referer: http://127.0.0.1/pass.php
Cookie: passx=87e8af376bc9d9bfec2c7c0193e6af70; PHPSESSID=l9hk7mfh0ppqecg8gialak6gt5
Connection: keep-alive
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Content-Length: 30
username=zurfyx&pass=password
Where it says
Content-Length: 30
username=zurfyx&pass=password
will be the post values.
The default media type in a POST request is application/x-www-form-urlencoded. This is a format for encoding key-value pairs. The keys can be duplicate. Each key-value pair is separated by an & character, and each key is separated from its value by an = character.
For example:
Name: John Smith
Grade: 19
Is encoded as:
Name=John+Smith&Grade=19
This is placed in the request body after the HTTP headers.
Form values in HTTP POSTs are sent in the request body, in the same format as the querystring.
For more information, see the spec.
Some of the webservices require you to place request data and metadata separately. For example a remote function may expect that the signed metadata string is included in a URI, while the data is posted in a HTTP-body.
The POST request may semantically look like this:
POST /?AuthId=YOURKEY&Action=WebServiceAction&Signature=rcLXfkPldrYm04 HTTP/1.1
Content-Type: text/tab-separated-values; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Length: []
Host: webservices.domain.com
Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8
Accept-Encoding: identity
User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0 (compatible; Indy Library)
name id
John G12N
Sarah J87M
Bob N33Y
This approach logically combines QueryString and Body-Post using a single Content-Type which is a "parsing-instruction" for a web-server.
Please note: HTTP/1.1 is wrapped with the #32 (space) on the left and with #10 (Line feed) on the right.
First of all, let's differentiate between GET and POST
Get: It is the default HTTP request that is made to the server and is used to retrieve the data from the server and query string that comes after ? in a URI is used to retrieve a unique resource.
this is the format
GET /someweb.asp?data=value HTTP/1.0
here data=value is the query string value passed.
POST: It is used to send data to the server safely so anything that is needed, this is the format of a POST request
POST /somweb.aspHTTP/1.0
Host: localhost
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded //you can put any format here
Content-Length: 11 //it depends
Name= somename
Why POST over GET?
In GET the value being sent to the servers are usually appended to the base URL in the query string,now there are 2 consequences of this
The GET requests are saved in browser history with the parameters. So your passwords remain un-encrypted in browser history. This was a real issue for Facebook back in the days.
Usually servers have a limit on how long a URI can be. If have too many parameters being sent you might receive 414 Error - URI too long
In case of post request your data from the fields are added to the body instead. Length of request params is calculated, and added to the header for content-length and no important data is directly appended to the URL.
You can use the Google Developer Tools' network section to see basic information about how requests are made to the servers.
and you can always add more values in your Request Headers like Cache-Control , Origin , Accept.
There are many ways/formats of post parameters
formdata
raw data
json
encoded data
file
xml
They are controlled by content-type in Header that are representes as mime-types.
In CGI Programming on the World Wide Web the author says:
Using the POST method, the server sends the data as an input stream to
the program. ..... since the server passes information to this program
as an input stream, it sets the environment variable CONTENT_LENGTH to
the size of the data in number of bytes (or characters). We can use
this to read exactly that much data from standard input.
For requests not sent by HTML forms, does HTTP limit the Content-Type of a request to application/x-www-form-urlencoded for non-file uploads, or is that MIME type "right"/standard/semantically meaningful in any other way?
For example, PHP automatically parses the content into $_POST, which seems to indicate that x-www-form-urlencoded is expected by the server. On the other hand, I could use Ajax to send a JSON object in the HTTP request content and set the Content-Type to application/json. At least some server technologies (e.g. WSGI) would not try to parse that, and instead provide it in original form to the script.
What MIME type should I use in POST and PUT requests in a RESTful API to ensure compliance with all server implementations of HTTP? I'm disregarding such technologies as SOAP and JSON-RPC because they tunnel protocols through HTTP instead of using HTTP as intended.
Short Answer
You should specify whichever content type best describes the HTTP message entity body.
Long Answer
For example, PHP automatically parses the content into $_POST, which seems to indicate that x-www-form-urlencoded is expected by the server.
The server is not "expecting" x-www-form-urlencoded. PHP -- in an effort to make the lives of developers simpler -- will parse the form-encoded entity body into the $_POST superglobal if and only if Content-Type: x-www-form-urlencoded AND the entity body is actually a urlencoded key-value string. A similar process is followed for messages arriving with Content-Type: multipart/form-data to generate the $_FILES array. While helpful, these superglobals are unfortunately named and they obfuscate what's really happening in terms of the actual HTTP transactions.
What MIME type should I use in POST and PUT requests in a RESTful API
to ensure compliance with all server implementations of HTTP?
You should specify whichever content type best describes the HTTP message entity body. Always adhere to the official HTTP specification -- you can't go wrong if you do that. From RFC 2616 Sec 7.2.1 (emphasis added):
Any HTTP/1.1 message containing an entity-body SHOULD include a
Content-Type header field defining the media type of that body. If and
only if the media type is not given by a Content-Type field, the
recipient MAY attempt to guess the media type via inspection of its
content and/or the name extension(s) of the URI used to identify the
resource. If the media type remains unknown, the recipient SHOULD
treat it as type "application/octet-stream".
Any mainstream server technology will adhere to these rules. Thoughtful web applications will not trust your Content-Type header, because it may or may not be correct. The originator of the message is free to send a totally bogus value. Usually the Content-Type header is checked as a preliminary validation measure, but the content is further verified by parsing the actual data. For example, if you're PUTing JSON data to a REST service, the endpoint might first check to make sure that you've sent Content-Type: application/json, but then actually parse the entity body of your message to ensure it really is valid JSON.
I've been putting in some research around REST. I noticed that the Amazon S3 API uses mainly http headers for their REST interface. This was a surprise to me, since I assumed that the interface would work mainly off request parameters.
My question is this: Should I develop my REST interface using mainly http headers, or should I be using request parameters?
The question mainly is whether the parameters defined are part of the resource identifier (URI) or not. if so, then you would use the request parameters otherwise HTTP custom headers. For example, passing the id of the album in a music gallery must be part of the URI.
Remember, for example /employee/id/45 (Or /employee?id=45, REST does not have a prejudice against query string parameters or for clean slash separated URIs) identifies one resource. Now you could use content-negotiation by sending request header content-type: text/plain or content-type: image/jpg to get the info or the image. In this respect, resource is deemed to be the same and header only used to define format of the resource.
Generally, I am not a big fan of HTTP custom headers. This usually assumes the client to have a prior knowledge of the server implementation (not discoverable through natural HTTP means, i.e. hypermedia) which always is considered a REST anti-pattern
HTTP headers usually define aspects of HTTP orthogonal to what is to be achieved in the process of request/response. Authorization header (really a misnomer, should have been authentication) is a classic example.
I'm developing a REST-ful webservice, and I have a question about the HTTP PUT method.
I want to allow people to submit content using a application/form-data request body. However, the default response will be in application/xml.
Is this acceptable?
Evert
Content types are only important within the scope of a single request. All they do is describe the format of the content that is being sent.
Your web service should provide the response most acceptable to the client request that it is capable of providing. The client request should include an Accept header that describes the acceptable content types. If your service can't provide any of the content types in this header then return 406 Not Acceptable
In your situation, if your client GET requests include application/xml in the Accept header then it is fine to respond with application/xml, regardless of any PUT request made on the requested resources.
EDIT:
The status code definition for 406 Not Acceptable includes a note with the following:
Note: HTTP/1.1 servers are allowed to return responses which are
not acceptable according to the accept headers sent in the
request. In some cases, this may even be preferable to sending a
406 response. User agents are encouraged to inspect the headers of
an incoming response to determine if it is acceptable.
So you can return application/xml whenever you want.
RESTful services should use the correct HTTP method (GET,HEAD,PUT,DELETE or POST) for the action, ensure that any scoping information is contained in the URI and ensure that the HTTP message envelope does not contain another envelope i.e. SOAP.
Roy Fieldings 2000 Ph.D. dissertation: Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-Based Software Architectures forms the foundation of REST.