- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 11:01:43 -0800
- To: James Manger <James@Manger.com.au>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
On Nov 2, 2009, at 4:40 AM, James Manger wrote: > [Comments on the URI Template working draft] > > Constructing a URI with a substring of a user-provided variable > value sounds useful. The current working draft has a dictionary site > as an example (/dictionary/{term:1}/{term} produces /dictionary/c/ > cat), and mentions hash-based storage. > > Another important example is dates. Many, many URI designs > incorporate dates, in quite a variety of ways (just year, year/month/ > day, XML-style timestamp...) -- which sounds like a perfect > situation to use a URI template. Well, not really. It is fairly common for URI layouts to incorporate some portion of a date value, such as the year and/or month of publication. Those are simple variable substitutions like: /post/{year}{month}/{title} I have never seen a resource layout incorporate the current time. In other words, there is no need for the template syntax to be aware of date fields because (in this case) it is simpler for the variable values to be limited as such. String prefix/suffix makes sense because they are ignorant of variable semantics no matter what the values might be. Using substrings to extract fields from a date value means that we know it is a date value, and thus we can use a more specific value definition like {seconds} without changing the syntax. Thanks for the detailed proposal. I think it would make sense if we were trying to act like a programming language in the template, but we are really trying hard to avoid that. ....Roy
Received on Monday, 2 November 2009 19:02:25 UTC