W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > July 2011

Re: uri-templates 0.4 javascript implementation feedback

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:07:13 -0700
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-Id: <9A24541B-2B2C-47BD-B353-63AFB3AE8517@gbiv.com>
To: Marc Portier <mpo@outerthought.org>
This is an old comment that I missed ...

On Apr 28, 2011, at 12:17 AM, Marc Portier wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Finally got round at this javascript implementation of
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gregorio-uritemplate-04
> 
> (minus the partial syntax and some more testing)
> 
> 
> Anyway, it is open at:
> https://github.com/marc-portier/uri-templates
> 
> It wraps inside JQuery and comes with tests up in QUnit.
> (JQuery dependency currently limited to the handy $.extend and $.isFunction)
> 
> 
> Must say getting my head around things asked more time then I initially expected: clarity and elegance of the syntax and explanation did hide quite some more special cases then I would of have thought of.
> 
> One case I still haven't ironed out, to the extend I'm liking my solution more :) is this:
> 
>> tested pattern: {;list}
>> Expected: ";val1,val2,val3"
>> Result:	  ";list=val1,val2,val3"
>> 
>> tested pattern: {;keys}
>> Expected: ";key1,val1,key2,val2"
>> Result:	  ";keys=key1,val1,key2,val2"
>> 
> 
> which in my mind (and implementation) follows more closely the line of thinking in:
> 
>> 
>> tested pattern: {?list}
>> Expected: "?list=val1,val2,val3"
>> 
>> tested pattern: {?keys}
>> Expected: "?keys=key1,val1,key2,val2"
>> 
> 
> the consistency I see is this: both ; and ? operators deal with named parameters, in unexploded form the values are wrapped up in one string, but still expect value.

Yes, I made the same mistake in draft 05 for the Level 4 examples
but got it right in the section on Default.  I'll fix it for 06.

....Roy
Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 02:07:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 15 July 2011 02:07:40 GMT