Yeah I noticed that as well, it makes me wonder about the rest of his technical assertions that I'm less able to judge.
Just in case anyone was wondering here's the HTTP 1.1 rfc: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt A simple search will show that it does include PUT and DELETE.
> "... it makes me wonder about the rest of his technical assertions that I'm less able to judge."
What technical assertions? From what I can gather, he's just pointing out what he sees in the code and what he thinks it might be doing. None of that feels like technical assertions (apart from the statement about PUT and GET).
He also implied that the presence of PUT and DELETE alone demonstrate that the app is using WebDAV and not a standard REST API via RFC2616 et al.
He also stated that WebDAV isn't a standard (ie RFC).
He also stated that you don't need PUT or DELETE because it can be done 'on the server'. (I'm not sure how you get your data to the server without HTTP verbs, but..)
With that said, his other work looks spot on; you don't always have to know how to architect a service in order to figure out what's broken with it. He's done a service to the community by taking this thing apart and seeing what makes it tick.
Just in case anyone was wondering here's the HTTP 1.1 rfc: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt A simple search will show that it does include PUT and DELETE.