> I thought the rest api was meant for geoserver configuration, not > only for access. I thus expected an API for configuration to have a 1-1 > relationship between the rest api and the configuration. I think we just have a different of opinion here... but I dont think it necessarily have to. I expect GeoServer to support REST api's in which we dont have a one to one object model for... i mean... this is the whole point of frameworks like restlet is it not? To do the mapping from the rest structure to your actual objects.
Anyways... I think it makes sense to have a 1-1 relationship in some cases... but to come up with a new config object soley for the reason that it is in a rest api seems a bit off to me. I could be wrong... and others better at REST may differ. -- Justin Deoliveira The Open Planning Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
