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

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

From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2008 10:01:15 -0700
Message-ID: <490C8B5B.3040207@berkeley.edu>
To: Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@subbu.org>
CC: Mike Schinkel <mikeschinkel@gmail.com>, "'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

Subbu Allamaraju wrote:
> 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?

the question is more how many page authors will be able to reliably 
develop forms against services/servers? i think mike's idea is pretty 
good because it increases loose coupling between clients and servers.

on today's web, forms and services are more or less tightly coupled, and 
they almost are developed as one thing. mike proposes an architecture 
that introduces a more loose coupling, because a form is able to 
interact with more services than before.

( mike, please correct me if i am wrong. )

> 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.

yes, but if you have some service out there that expect certain URIs, 
then currently it is not possible to build a form for that, unless the 
service does expect form-encoded data. mike's proposal would allow forms 
to interact with a much wider set of services.

cheers,

dret.
Received on Saturday, 1 November 2008 17:02:30 GMT

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