- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:05:48 -0700
- To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>, "Stefan Tilkov" <stefan.tilkov@innoq.com>
- Cc: <public-web-http-desc@w3.org>
I think that MarkB is saying that specifying the input and output parameters for GET/PUT/POST is violating the uniform operations. I strongly disagree. I think that one can have uniform operations that are "strongly-typed". At least one case is validation. Another case is the ability to describe the xml documents returned and which parts are hypermedia allows very interesting RESTful choreography. For example, Atom specifies that a POST Entry to the "POSTEntry" URI results in a document that has a URI for the "EDITEntry" interface (which I think is GET,PUT, DELETE). This association between two URIs can only be done if somehow the URI in the POSTEntry response is tied to the EDITEntry interface. An ideal thing for a Web Description Language. Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: public-web-http-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:public-web-http-desc- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mark Baker > Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 6:37 PM > To: Stefan Tilkov > Cc: public-web-http-desc@w3.org > Subject: Role of operations? > > > Stefan, > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 11:04:06PM +0200, Stefan Tilkov wrote: > > But if you want to generate code from the service description - and > > I'm not arguing for it, just pointing out the options - there will be > > some abstract description of what interactions (to avoid the term > > 'operations') are possible, and what data is being exchanged. > > I don't think you can so easily sweep the operation under the rug. > > By choosing to publish a RESTful service (ah, it's nice to be able to > treat that as axiomatic for once! 8-), the service provider has > explicitly opted to avoid application specific operations, and use uniform > ones instead. I don't think it's in in the interest of either the > service provider, nor would-be consumers, to introduce other operations > in a description language, since at best IMO, they'd just serve to > confuse. > > For that reason, I don't think the Py* libraries constitute a good > example of what it is we're trying to accomplish/enable here. > > Cheers, > > Mark. > -- > Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca > Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2005 05:06:06 UTC