W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > May 2003

Re: Magic

From: Walden Mathews <waldenm@optonline.net>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 16:02:22 -0400
To: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Jim Webber <jim.webber@arjuna.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-id: <008701c31d78$66283d20$1702a8c0@WorkGroup>

>
> In a RESTful example, you would have a different URI for each PO number.
You
> use the "new PO" URI to obtain a new URI for your PO. Then you use PUT on
> the PO URI to submit the order, and GET on the PO URI to return it's state
> (the PO plus its current status). Another PUT would submit changes.

The anti-REST group claims to have done its homework on the
workings of RESTful HTTP for application interface design.  The above
may be workable (who knows?), but it also seems non-typical of how
I believe most REST designers would do it.  Is the homework complete?

>
> Okay -- that takes care of the basic CRUD operations -- but order
processing
> involves a lot more than CRUD operations. So please, Mark, can you provide
> us a real-world example? One that lets us do thinks like aggregate
> information about orders by customer, back order status, payment terms,
> geographical region, etc?

Ann, this is great territory to get into, but it probably belongs on
the www-ws list instead of here.  If you will please develop the questions
implied above and post them on www-ws, I'd be happy to help navigate
to some answers.

For instance, how do you want to access aggregate information?  Come
up with some example SOAP-based operations, and let's see if we
can map them to REST design.  From what you've indicated above, I
don't see any real problems.  See you on www-ws,

Walden

>
> Regards,
> Anne
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of Mark Baker
> > Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2003 7:01 PM
> > To: Jim Webber
> > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Magic
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, May 17, 2003 at 08:38:32PM +0100, Jim Webber wrote:
> > > I suspect this is not feasible for everyone to do. However, if the
REST
> > > contingent would perhaps post a simple application somewhere we could
> > > download, install, and marvel at it perhaps some of these
> > issues would go
> > > away. Or at least the non-REST crowd could argue on a more
> > informed basis.
> >
> > I like my lightbulb example.  It's worked on two previous occasions to
> > give folks epiphanies;
> >
> > GET on a URI returns "0" or "1" depending on the state of the bulb.
> > PUT on that same URI with "0" turns the bulb off, "1" turns it on.
> >
> > That's it, at least to get your head around state transfer, and past
> > the mistaken assumption that the Web is for humans.
> >
> > I recommend followups to www-ws@w3.org too.
> >
> > MB
> > --
> > Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
> > Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
> >   Actively seeking contract work or employment
> >
>
Received on Sunday, 18 May 2003 15:58:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:19 GMT