- From: Jan Algermissen <jalgermissen@topicmapping.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 00:43:18 +0200
- To: Jan Algermissen <jalgermissen@topicmapping.com>
- Cc: Stefan Tilkov <stefan.tilkov@innoq.com>, Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, public-web-http-desc@w3.org
On Jun 18, 2005, at 12:29 AM, Jan Algermissen wrote: > > > On Jun 17, 2005, at 11:59 PM, Stefan Tilkov wrote: > > >> When we do code generation in our MDA projects, we examine a few >> use case implementations and look for similarities. If we find >> them, refactoring them into code generation templates is one of >> many options. The same might be true here: If convenient libraries >> for Amazon, Atom, Google and whatever-RESTful-app share a lot of >> code patterns that are not easily or efficiently put into a >> framework, they might be candidates for code generation. The >> description (or model) has to provide sufficient information to >> drive the generator. >> > > If within your 'system space' (be it the Web as a whole or some > enterprise) you find such similarities, the REST- or Web-way to > handle them is to standardize (globally or within enterprise > context) message formats that capture them. Maybe a way to say this more 'formal' is that you make application semantics visible by moving them into linking semantics. The libraries we are talking about are actually hard-coding the linking semantics[1] defined in the message type specifications. Jan [1] maybe think of them as 'application state change option semantics" > It is an evolutionary process that 'factors out' application > semantics into message formats once they are recognized as > 'similarities'. > > Isn't that why there is RSS instead of doing blog machine > processing with HTML? > > Now that I look at it this way, I think people should start to > collect 'enterprise > behavioural patterns' and express them as (suggested) message types. > > What about UBL? Isn't UBL doing exactly this (for some part of > enterprise context)? > > Jan > > > >> >> That said, I'm not at all sure that generating code for RESTful >> Web APIs is a good idea -- but then again, I'm not sure the >> description language itself is a good idea either. >> >> I find it hard, though, to imagine a useful Web description >> language that would not also be usable for code generation. >> >> >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______________________ > Jan Algermissen, Consultant & > Programmer http://jalgermissen.com > Tugboat Consulting, 'Applying Web technology to enterprise > IT' http://www.tugboat.de > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ ____________________ Jan Algermissen, Consultant & Programmer http://jalgermissen.com Tugboat Consulting, 'Applying Web technology to enterprise IT' http://www.tugboat.de
Received on Friday, 17 June 2005 22:43:26 UTC