- From: Hugh Winkler <hughw@hughw.net>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:16:03 -0500
- To: "'Leigh Dodds'" <leigh@ldodds.com>
- Cc: <public-web-http-desc@w3.org>
> > Natural language instructions are OK when the intelligent agent is > expected > > to be a human operating a browser or other user agent. If you had an XML > > form you could define a description tag or attribute that would do the > trick > > -- just imagine WADL like <parameter name="appid" type="xsd:string" > > required="true" description="The application id" />. In a forms language > > this description is not a "nice to have"; it's essential so that a > client > > program can display it to the user. In a code generation scenario, this > > description is optional, or need not be formalized, since it's only the > > programmer, reading the service documentation at design time, who needs > to > > understand the meanings of the parameters. > > Why is it optional for code generation? Knowledge of type and > optionality of arguments are precisely the kind of data that I'd expect > to have to generate useful code. E.g. so I could throw an exception if a > request is sent without required parameters, or to generate type-safe > methods. > A programmer surely has to be able to read it somewhere. He could read a description of parameters in a book, or on a web page somewhere. A description attribute is a sensible place to keep the description nearby some other relevant stuff. But a description attribute is useless to a code generator. A code generator cannot do anything useful with a natural language description like "Date of birth".
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2005 16:16:13 UTC