On 11/28/06, Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And if the publisher of the *same* functionality used this instead; > > > > http://example.org/kdjfalkjdfnawkflaudfnakjsdnfalufh > > > > then what would the operation be there? > > Incomprehensible to any rational person?
8-) It would still be GET. Consider that you'd still receive the data you expected, but without - using your argument - knowing the operation! How is that possible? An essential aspect of distributed computing is that client and server share a *contract*; if the client doesn't know the whole contract - in this case the operation - then it isn't shared. Something else must be going on! > Quite clearly, because I thought that the major idea was that the URI > was in itself documentation of the action. Okay so drawGraph should > possibly be just "Graph" and viewing Graph as a resource, but what is > wrong from a REST perspective with a resource of > http://somewhere.com/maths/graph?x=mypoints&y=mypoints ? > > GET will be idempotent and is considering graph to be a complex resource. > > If you are saying that REST isn't that simple then I'm suprised. I > was sure that choosing the right URI name was a key part of REST. It is, but it doesn't identify the operation, it identifies the "thing" the operation is to be invoked upon. It's an object id. Mark.
