On 07/12/06, Stefan Tilkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 7, 2006, at 7:10 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>
>  > How do I document and formalise to a consumer how they get an invoice
>  > or place and order? What format do I use to describe the URI,
>  > Request, Response, pre-conditions, post-conditions and invariants of
>  > the invocation? How is this description then versioned, published and
>  > managed.
>  >
>
>  The best answer probably is:
>  You use a collection of HTML pages.

Which isn't as much use as a nice and formal WSDL which can be quickly
consumed by standard tools.  REST really needs to address this issue
as versioning documents (which is what HTML is) is a step back over a
formal and technical interface spec IMO.

>
>  Very few things are formalized, e.g. documentation of namespaces with
>  RDDL, but that's orthogonal to REST and HTTP.
>
>  Another spec currently being created is URI templates (http://
>  bitworking.org/news/URI_Templates), which might become part of a
>  larger description language. It's (obviously) not yet widely deployed, .
>
>  There's an ongoing discussion about description languages for the Web
>  at [EMAIL PROTECTED], archived at http://lists.w3.org/
>  Archives/Public/public-web-http-desc/. One candidate is WADL (Web
>  Application Description Language), documented at http://
>  wadl.dev.java.net/.

I'll check out WADL, for me this lack of a standard mechanism is a big
mark down for REST as an enterprise solution so I'm assuming something
will be sorted in the next 12 months.

>
>  >
>  > Saying REST is simple means that this should be simple....
>
>  An HTML page *is* simple, probably no doubt about that. Wether it's
>  sufficient is another (very valid) question. A typical REST answer
>  (and one that I don't fully agree with) is that you're no better off
>  in WS-* land; you can use XML Schema in REST, too, WSDL doesn't add
>  very much (and definitely not enough) on top, and the fixed interface
>  means you have a reduced need to document things.
>
>  As I said, I don't really buy into this line of reasoning.

Nope me neither :)
>
>  Stefan
>  --
>  Stefan Tilkov, http://www.innoq.com/blog/st/
>
>                    

Reply via email to