11435Re: [rest-discuss] RE: [whatwg] Proposing URI Templates for WebForms 2.0
- Nov 4, 2008On Nov 1, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Erik Wilde wrote:
> that is a circular argument. and in many cases, if you are buildingNot sure how you came to that conclusion, but I find that argument a
> a RESTful service primarily intended as an API, then URI design for
> it will look very different from form-encoded data.
> i think the main question is whether HTML should look beyond
> services designed specifically for backing forms, or not. it
> certainly could without harming backwards-compatibility, and one
> could also argue that this would actually promote the design and
> implementation of services with more well-designed RESTful APIs than
> form-encoded data. seen this way, such a feature would be a pretty
> smart way of slowly improving the state of how services are provided
> on the web.
If I understand correctly, Mike's argument for supporting templates is
to avoid requiring JS support. So, a RESTful server that needs to be
consumed by a browser without requiring JS support has just one option
- that is to use a media type that can be recognized by browsers,
which is HTML. That is, it uses (X)HTML representations, supports
query parameters and forms. The so-called API server therefore becomes
a web server.
I can understand the merits of URI template support for HTML on its
own, but I don't think it is correct to argue that such a support will
make it easy to consume APIs.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>