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


      but GET from


      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