Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3453Re: [rest-discuss] Rebel

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey Winter
    Mar 1, 2003
      > As far as exports are concered I'd imagine that you could deal with the
      > issue of XBEL fragments vs conformant XBEL documents by using content
      > negotiation, rather than a separate URI space. Sending the appropriate
      > Accept: header would indicate whether a fragment or a standalone XBEL
      > document was required. Or would this be an abuse of Accept:? This
      > approach could also be used to specify 'flat' for neseted resource
      > expansions.

      I'm not sure that there is any hard-and-fast rule about how to employ
      the Accept: header, but I think the general use case is one in which
      the various resource respresentations are otherwise addressable on
      their own. For example, you PUT to

      /image/test.jpg
      /image/test.bmp
      /image/test.gif

      but GET from

      /image/test

      with an appropriate Accept header.

      Most of the examples I've seen of pushing the Accept: header much
      beyond this start to subtly introduce what amounts to a hidden
      address space.

      - Jeff
    • Show all 10 messages in this topic