W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > November 2008

Re: [rest-discuss] RE: [whatwg] Proposing URI Templates for WebForms 2.0

From: Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@subbu.org>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 09:48:51 -0700
Cc: "'Mark Nottingham'" <mnot@mnot.net>, "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, "'Jerome Louvel'" <contact@noelios.com>, <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, <uri@w3.org>, <rest-discuss@yahoogroups.com>
Message-Id: <DB78BE7C-1D9F-47B3-AD6D-3F77BC85A118@subbu.org>
To: Mike Schinkel <mikeschinkel@gmail.com>

I see the use cases, but what is the server gaining with this  
flexibility? In other words, how many servers out there are going to  
benefit from this technique?

Not having templates in forms does not violate URI opacity since HTML  
forms do follow a well-defined and well-understood approach to  
construct a URI from form parameters.

Subbu

On Nov 1, 2008, at 12:24 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote:

> Mark;
>
> Mark>> I didn't see any use cases in the original e-mail; did I miss
> something? An example or two tends to focus discussion well...
>
> Example use-cases? You want example use-cases? Happy to oblige. :-)
>
> But first let me ask you think in terms of the context where people  
> can put
> HTML put can't put Javascript such as in some hosting blogging  
> platforms and
> on forums. Also think in terms of websites being able to say "post  
> this code
> into your blog, etc."
>
> 1.) I'm (hypothetically) the owner of atllogos.com and I want on  
> provide an
> HTML for to let visitors select from a drop-down to be able to visit  
> the
> Twitter users listed on http://atllogos.com/startup.html (Note that
> "template" is a new attribute that is used for templates when no  
> "action" is
> specified):
>
> See these people on Twitter:
> <form method="get" template="http://twitter.com/{name}">
> <select id="name">
> <option>sanjay</option>
> <option>lance</option>
> <option>stephenfleming</option>
> <option>keithmcgreggor</option>
> <option>melaniebrandt</option>
> <option>jhaynie</option>
> <option>MikeSchinkel</option>
> <option>coty</option>
> <option>wei_yang</option>
> <option>mmealling</option>
> <option>pfreet</option>
> </select>
> <input type="submit" value="Go!">
> </form>
>
> 2.) I'm writing a blog post on WordPress.com where I am advocating  
> that
> people living in Georgia find and join a meetup group so I give them  
> a form
> with a drop-down that allows them to select their city:
>
> Select your state:
> <form method="get" template="http://www.meetup.com/cities/us/ga/ 
> {city}/">
> <select id="city">
> <option value="acworth">Acworth</option>
> <option value="albany">Albany</option>
> <!-- ... -->
> <option value="warner_robins">Warner Robins</option>
> <option value="woodstock">Woodstock</option>
> </select>
> <input type="submit" value="Find a Meetup Group in Georgia!">
> </form>
>
> 3.) I am writing a blog post on Blogger.com about "Ride to Work Day"  
> where I
> am advocating people in the USA ride their motorcycle to work and I  
> want to
> include a form that let's them type in their ZIP code and check there
> weather:
>
> <form method="get" template="http://www.weather.com/weather/local/ 
> {zip}/">
> <input type="text" name="zip"/>
> <input type="submit" value="Check Weather!">
> </form>
>
> And I can go on and on like this if doing so is what it will take to  
> get URI
> Templates support in HTML5 forms. :-)
>
> Currently what I am doing SIMPLY CANNOT be accomplished if one  
> doesn't have
> access to Javascript or when they don't have the programming skill.
>
> BTW, I'm making a strong and reasonable assumption here that the URI
> Authorities I've mentioned will each be documenting that their URL  
> structure
> and thus blessing this approach so this DOES NOT violate URI Opacity.
>
> In the case of #1 and #2, spiders like Google can crawl those as  
> well but
> could not crawl them. That's especially important if someone decides  
> to
> architect a site using "clean" URLs and then use drop-downs in forms  
> to
> allow people to navigate to pages. If implemented in Javascript it  
> can't be
> reliably called but if URI templates were supported in forms it  
> could be.
>
> As I told Ian in a private email recently, there are really only 3  
> things I
> want to HTML5 and they all related to forms:
>
> 1.) URI Templates in forms,
> 2.) PUT in forms, and
> 3.) DELETE in forms. :-)
>
> So do my use-case examples pass your "compelling" test, or do I have  
> to
> continue trying? :-)
>
> -Mike Schinkel
> President; NewClarity LLC
> Organizer: Atlanta Web Entrepreneurs
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeschinkel
> http://twitter.com/mikeschinkel
> http://mikeschinkel.com
> http://atlanta-web.org
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net]
> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 1:24 AM
> To: Mike Schinkel
> Cc: 'Ian Hickson'; 'Jerome Louvel'; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org; uri@w3.org 
> ;
> rest-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [whatwg] Proposing URI Templates for WebForms 2.0
>
> I didn't see any use cases in the original e-mail; did I miss  
> something? An
> example or two tends to focus discussion well...
>
> Cheers,
>
> On 01/11/2008, at 12:59 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote:
>
> > Mark>> compelling use cases for this, but we haven't seen those yet
> > AFAIK.
> >
> > What classifies as a "compelling use-case" in your mind?
> >
> > -Mike Schinkel
> > President; NewClarity LLC
> > Organizer: Atlanta Web Entrepreneurs
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeschinkel
> > http://twitter.com/mikeschinkel
> > http://mikeschinkel.com
> > http://atlanta-web.org
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: uri-request@w3.org [mailto:uri-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of  
> Mark
> > Nottingham
> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 6:38 PM
> > To: Ian Hickson
> > Cc: Jerome Louvel; whatwg@lists.whatwg.org; uri@w3.org;
> > rest-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [whatwg] Proposing URI Templates for WebForms 2.0
> >
> >
> > +1, although I'd say it a bit differently.
> >
> > Doing it in script precludes unintended reuse, e.g., for
> > accessibility,
> > search engines, and so forth; it's not a good solution
> > *if* there are compelling use cases for this, but we haven't seen
> > those yet
> > AFAIK.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >
> > On 29/10/2008, at 6:20 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Jerome Louvel wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Even though the URI template RFC is not finalized yet, we already
> >>> have a complete support for it, on the server-side, in the Restlet
> >>> framework.
> >>> We happily use them for our URI-based routing and I think they  
> add a
> >>> lot of expressiveness while keeping a simple syntax. Usage  
> example:
> >>> http://www.restlet.org/tutorial#part11
> >>>
> >>> They are also supported in WADL, the RESTful description language,
> >>> and in the OpenSearch specification. Extending their usage to HTML
> >>> forms sounds like a logical and useful step.
> >>
> >> It seems to me like URI templates can be trivially done from script
> >> and from the server side already; given the poor
> >> backwards-compatibility story of URI templates, what do we gain  
> from
> >> adding it to the language?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ian Hickson U+1047E )
> >> \._.,--....,'``. fL
> >> http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _
> >> \ ;`._ ,.
> >> Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--
> >> (,_..'`-.;.'
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
> >
> >
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
> __._,_.___
> Messages in this topic (8)Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
> Messages | Members
> MARKETPLACE
> From kitchen basics to easy recipes - join the Group from Kraft Foods
>
> Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
> Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch  
> format to Traditional
> Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
> RECENT ACTIVITY
> 	
> 5
> New Members
> Visit Your Group
> Yahoo! Finance
> It's Now Personal
> Guides, news,
> advice & more.
> Y! Groups blog
> the best source
> for the latest
> scoop on Groups.
> All-Bran
> Day 10 Club
> on Yahoo! Groups
> Feel better with fiber.
> .
>
> __,_._,___
Received on Saturday, 1 November 2008 16:49:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:41 GMT