- From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 10:30:28 -0700
- To: Dietrich Schulten <ds@escalon.de>
- Cc: Hydra <public-hydra@w3.org>
Hi Dietrich, > The use case is written in terms of http because it is the most prevalent ReST protocol My concern was not about protocol independence; I'm fine with the implementation being HTTP-only. > So actually I do not "want to POST" in the first place …then I don't think it should be part of the story :-) > but I want to be able to execute the method hydra is giving me I think the story should be like that. > Since CRUD is bad for ReST [1], I am pretty sure we should not abstract away the uniform interface methods as CRUD. Not advocating CRUD or anything else. My concern was about the level of abstraction of the stories. If the stories are about POST and PUT etc., we're building an HTTP library IMHO, not a Hydra library. > With the clarification above, are the user stories ok for you? I'd want them more high level, on the level of actions and hypermedia controls. One story for me: X. As a programmer, I want to find and use hypermedia controls in representations received from the server. > Do you think it is a good idea to guide the client development by user stories? Absolutely! Ruben
Received on Saturday, 18 June 2016 17:31:03 UTC