- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:38:00 -0400
- To: Stefan Tilkov <stefan.tilkov@innoq.com>
- Cc: public-web-http-desc@w3.org
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 08:26:38AM +0200, Stefan Tilkov wrote:
> >Strongly agreed. That's a forms language use case, since that
> >possible
> >state transition is discovered at runtime. That's what REST's
> >"hypermedia as the engine of application state" constraint is all
> >about.
> >
>
> Now I'm starting to understand your point. Would you say that
> describing the possible state transitions (the 'classes') statically
> (in the description language), while still discovering and following
> the actual transitions ('instances' ) at runtime, violates REST
> principles?
Before I can answer that, I need to understand what you mean by that
distinction between "actual" and "possible" transitions. As I see it,
"possible transition" is as good as it gets with REST because it's
stateless.
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 13:37:19 UTC