Re: URI Template experience

Hmm... I've spent the last several months NOT asking Roy to start  
working on a Templates draft to keep him free for HTTPbis work...

Oh, well ;)


On 24/05/2009, at 4:40 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> On May 22, 2009, at 7:24 AM, Joe Gregorio wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Roy T. Fielding  
>> <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Joe,
>>>
>>> Your question implies that the features in the current draft are
>>> somehow dependent on the extent to which the current draft has
>>> been implemented in the wild.  I think that is backwards, since
>>> the draft received many comments and did not change as a result.
>>> For example,
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/mid/07109D44-233D-42F3-ACB0-56B4A6562903@gbiv.com
>>>
>>> So, the answer to your question is that implementors are patiently
>>> waiting (perhaps too patiently) for the draft to be updated.
>>> Would it help if I issued a draft with the alternative syntax?
>>
>> I asked the question because there are a bunch of implementations  
>> and if
>> there was a great attraction to the current syntax beyond {foo}  
>> then I wanted
>> to know that. From what I can tell from the ensuing conversation  
>> there is a need
>> for more complex capabilities beyond {foo}, but no one is in love  
>> with
>> the current
>> syntax. That's good news to me because I prefer your proposed system.
>>
>> I can update the current draft to your proposal, or you can generate
>> a draft yourself if you think that will go faster.
>
> I think it would go faster if we worked together on it, at least
> in terms of taking turns crafting prose and implementations.  I need
> to do a lot of httpbis writing as well, so having something small to
> get me started again would help with focus.  So, yes, I'll make a
> pass at it this weekend and send it to you for review.
>
> ....Roy
>
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/

Received on Monday, 1 June 2009 15:58:51 UTC