On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 09:48:29PM +0000, Marc Gravell wrote: > Re the whole "what should an endpoint url look like" thing - I had a similar > discussion with a user re protobuf-net; in the end it was quicker to just > *default* to the former (since it doesn't need any extra specification), but > *support* both - so the code detects key strings in the supplied url and > works some magic. Ok. But defaults may vary :) > i.e. if I give it the endpoint: "http://foo/foocorp"; > then it uses "http://foo/foocorp/myservice/somemethod"; > > but if I give it the endpoint "http://foo/foocorp?svc={service}&act={action} > " > it uses "http://foo/foocorp?svc=myservice&action=somemethod"; > > And so I can officially say "I don't care" about this discussion - either > suits me without any code-changes ;-p I've added support for user defined URLs too (in python %(xxx)s format).
So at least we may have clients compatible to different servers... As I understand other aspects (error encoding, content type) are common in all HTTP implementations? May be we'll run some compatibility tests? I've set one at http://psha.org.ru/pbuftest/?{service}.{action} Pavel -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
