Re: URI Template experience

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.

   Thanks,
   -joe

>
> ....Roy
>



-- 
Joe Gregorio        http://bitworking.org

Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 14:24:44 UTC