W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > September 2008

Re: URI Templates: done or dead?

From: Jerome Louvel <jerome.louvel@noelios.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:07:37 +0200
To: uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <gam894$q9o$1@ger.gmane.org>
Hi all,

While I was initially very enthousiast about this RFC, as also felt that 
it was going too far and becoming too complex.

In our case, Restlet/Java framework, we have implemented a minimalistic 
approach where URI templates are used for both formatting and parsing of 
URIs. No encoding or decoding is done at the template level, we 
preferred to handle all those aspects outside the template and to stick 
to strings inserted or parsed.

If our approach could become the core/mandatory part of the RFC that 
would make sure very happy. I'm not against having the other features 
optional extension, but I'm not really convinced that they will help for 
the adoption and homogeneity of implementations.

Best regards,
Jérôme Louvel
--
Restlet ~ Founder and Lead developer ~ http://www.restlet.org 
<http://www.restlet.org/>
Noelios Technologies ~ Co-founder ~ http://www.noelios.com



DeWitt Clinton a écrit :
> Well, I hope its not dead, as we still need a standard for URI templates.
>
> I personally agree that it is a little too complex, for the same 
> reasons you suggest, Mark.  But if no one expresses interest in doing 
> another iteration on the spec, then I'd still be +1 on shipping it as 
> is rather than dropping it altogether.  Even in its current form it is 
> quite useful, and I'd be comfortable implementing it as it stands.
>
> -DeWitt
>
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de 
> <mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de>> wrote:
>
>
>     Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
>
>         There hasn't been a lot of discussion or activity on URI
>         Templates recently, which either means it's very stable, or
>         very nearly dead.
>         ...
>
>
>     Or parts of them are stable, while the others are nearly dead :-)
>
>     Apparently the attempt to standardize the hard parts has failed so
>     far. So let's try to stick to the simple cases, and potentially
>     leave in extension points.
>
>     It probably would also make sense to look at what current
>     frameworks implement (JAVA: JSR-311, .NET: I think there's
>     something related to URI templates in 3.5?), and document that (if
>     it's interoperable).
>
>     BR, Julian
>
>

-- 
Jerome Louvel
http://www.noelios.com
Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2008 04:38:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:12 UTC