Re: Service Versioning

Do you have a use case for this, Mark?

On 4/27/06, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>
> Just thinking out loud -- not sure if this is a good idea or not.
>
> What if components were labelled with an indication of the revision
> of the service that they were introduced with?
>
> E.g.,
>
> <resource introduced="/revision/1">
>     <method name="GET">
>       ...
>     </method>
>     <method name="POST" introduced="/revision/2">
>       ...
>     </method>
> </resource>
>
> with rules for appropriate defaulting, etc. "introduced" probably
> isn't the best name, but gets the idea across; the value should be a
> URI-reference.
>
> This would allow clients to query the service for what revision it
> implements, and then know what (backwards-compatible) changes are
> implemented; it wouldn't have to optimistically try to POST, for
> example.
>
> In doing so, backwards-compatible changes (e.g., adding methods,
> adding representations, adding resources, adding optional query args)
> could be layered into descriptions without losing information about
> when they were introduced.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>