- From: Paul Downey <paul.downey@whatfettle.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 07:44:17 +0100
- To: Jan Algermissen <jalgermissen@topicmapping.com>
- Cc: public-web-http-desc@w3.org, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
On 13 Jun 2005, at 23:43, Jan Algermissen wrote: > Given you leave your browser when it is in some state X > of the purchase order app that tells you that the param name is A and > that > Amazon changes the Web app to require the param name to be B. When you > send the > 'outdated' form (== perform the outdated state transition) Amazon can > have provided > for this case and silently translate your state transition to the > required new one > without you noticing. That's exactly what I'm driving at. A sensible service will commit to supporting existing interactions, or flag up incompatible changes by using a different URI or media type etc. I still don't difficulties that arise in embodying an interaction in generated code. I'm wondering if by 'generated code' there is an assumption that means 'canned interaction'. That's not the case, as Stefan says later in this thread, any generated code is likely to layer a standard HTTP library. I know that's the case for Marc Hadley's WADL demonstrations. > -- http://blog.whatfettle.com
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2005 06:44:26 UTC