cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Diephouse <...@envoisolutions.com>
Subject Re: REST support proposal for review
Date Thu, 07 Sep 2006 21:17:37 GMT
+1 to all of this. I am looking for a way to do REST that allows mapping 
of verbs & URIs to different operations. One idea I had before is this:

http://netzooid.com/blog/2006/05/22/an-attempt-at-a-rest-programming-model/

I think one thing to look into is the WSDL2 support for HTTP, it is more 
RESTy, but its definitely not perfect.

- Dan

Steve Vinoski wrote:

> Hi Jervis,
>
> A few comments. First, "few verbs" is not a key idea of REST. Rather,  
> the REST architectural style promotes a uniform interface constraint,  
> where all resources support the same exact interface. The interface  
> ends up being small only because it has to be general purpose, not  
> because REST requires it to be small. For HTTP-based systems, the  
> REST uniform interface is the collection of HTTP verbs, primarily GET  
> and POST.
>
> Second, putting the verb in the URL is a Really Bad Idea™. URIs  
> identify resources and application states, not operations. The verb  
> is specified by the protocol. If you're really going to support REST,  
> you're probably going to implement it using HTTP, in which case you  
> need a raw HTTP binding if you don't already have one. But then that  
> in turn begs the question of what such a binding would offer over a  
> plain ol' servlet. Alternatively, REST can be implemented using  
> protocols other than HTTP, but I'm not sure going down that path  
> would buy you anything.
>
> There's much more I could say about what you've written in the wiki,  
> but let me cut it short and simply ask this: what are the goals of  
> having CXF "support REST"? Who or what does it benefit? What kinds of  
> systems do you envision making use of that support? Considering these  
> questions and their possible answers within the constraints of the  
> REST architectural style [1] is the only way to get this truly right,  
> IMO.
>
> --steve
>
> [1] <http://www.markbaker.ca/Talks/2004-xmlself/slide4-0.html>
>
> On Sep 7, 2006, at 11:37 AM, Liu, Jervis wrote:
>
>> Hi, I have put the REST support proposal on wiki for your review.  
>> Any comments are welcome.
>>
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CXF/REST+Support
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jervis
>
>


-- 
Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com


Mime
View raw message