Most of the Web description proposals that I've seen model methods as discrete things in the context of a resource, e.g., <resource name='Example'> <method name="GET"> <representation type="text/html">...</representation> ... </method> <method name="PUT"> <representation type="text/html">...</representation> ... </method> <method name="POST"> ... </method> </resource> I'm wondering if this is a good approach. While it makes sense to differentiate these things in code (because you need to glue the different methods to the implementation), it seems to me that non- POST methods are special; they have fixed, well-known semantics and operate on the state of the resource. Because of this, I'm wondering if it makes more sense to talk about the state of the resource as a first-order concept in the description, rather than operations on it (which don't need as much description); e.g., <resource name="Example"> <representation type="text/html"> <allow>GET PUT</allow>. ... </respresentation> <post> <input type="...">...</input> <output type="...">...</output> </post> </resource> That's just a straw man, I can see other formulations. The point is to encourage people NOT to think of this in terms of WSDL operations. Thoughts? -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/Received on Tuesday, 21 March 2006 17:10:47 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:58:33 UTC