Re: Assumptions about non-POST methods in Web description

On 2006/03/21, at 10:24 AM, Marc Hadley wrote:
> I think there could be cases where different combinations of  
> representation format and method are allowed/supported where  
> grouping of everything except POST might result in a lack of  
> expressivity. I suppose you could allow the representation element  
> to repeat to cover those cases if they are in the minority.

Yeah. It's a trade-off; I can see some situations where metadata  
(e.g., ACLs) will be asymmetric per method, and will therefore need  
to include that; e.g.,

<representation type="text/html">
   <acl method="GET" realm="readers"/>
   <acl method="PUT DELETE" realms= "readers writers"/>
</representation>

It's really just a different serialisation of the same data, the  
question is which communicates most clearly and which is easiest to  
use (two goals that are often at odds).

BTW, speaking of ACLs, an interesting reference is the WebDAV ACL spec;
   http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3744

It would be nice if a Web description format could easily  
interoperate with them (although I'm not terribly fond of the model;  
why didn't they just put ACLs directly on HTTP methods?)

--
Mark Nottingham
mnot@yahoo-inc.com

Received on Tuesday, 21 March 2006 18:34:09 UTC