W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > November 2006

Re: Rolled up Feedback on draft-gregorio-uritemplate-00

From: Jerome Louvel <contact@noelios.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:53:56 +0100
To: uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <ejf65j$f08$1@sea.gmane.org>

Here is a pointer illustrating the current usage of URI templates in 
server-side code: http://www.restlet.org/tutorial#part11

A use case that came to mind is an organization exposing some web 
services that can notify clients via HTTP when events occur. It would be 
great to be able to define a WADL document for the call-back service 
(using URI templates) and be sure that a skeleton server could be 
unambiguously generated.

I agree that the separator constraint isn't necessary in the URI 
template -> URI case, but maybe it wouldn't harm to add it for 
homogeneity purpose with the other use case.

Also, adding a "4.3 URI Template Matching" paragraph describing the URI 
-> URI template case with the required restriction seems useful to me.

Regards,
Jerome
---
http://www.restlet.org


Marc Hadley wrote :
> On Nov 9, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> 
>> On Nov 9, 2006, at 5:12 PM, Marc Hadley wrote:
>>> Actually the use case was server side. The commentator wanted to use 
>>> URI templates to deploy code that would be executed when a request 
>>> was made on a matching URI.
>>
>> So construct the matching URI space such that the template variables
>> are bordered by reserved characters.  There is no need to require it
>> of all templates.
>>
> Right. The commentator just wanted to be able to write some code that 
> would work for any URI template and discovered that wasn't possible 
> without the requested restriction. I think a warning/note in the spec 
> about this wouldn't go amiss.
> 
> Marc.
> 
> ---
> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
> CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 14:10:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:10 UTC