On 08/12/06, Stuart Charlton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > 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.
>
> How is an HTML FORM not a formal, technical interface
> spec? It exposes a simple data structure (a
> multi-value string dictionary), but otherwise, I
> thought simplicity was a good thing when appropriate.

Its as formal as a word document, its not something that can be
automatically consumed.

>
> WSDL provides very little formality. WSDL just
> provides code generation tools guidance on what global
> elements to use for operations, bodies, and faults.
> In a loosely coupled system, this frankly should be
> runtime metadata. This whole edifce, to me, strikes
> me as ridiculously brittle.

Its better than nothing (which is where REST is) it also can't be
runtime only as it has to be versioned and managed.


>
> A schema like RelaxNG or XSD provides quite a bit more
> formal value, though it's mostly syntactic.
>
> WSDL says little of pre/post conditions, invariants,
> versioning (!), and requires lots of care in designing
> an extensible interface. All of these require
> localized, specialized solutions, and copious human
> readable policy.

Tell me about it, the lack of WS-Contract is a big irritation to me.

>
> REST still needs the above too, except with REST it's
> all just hypermedia, so arguably more findable,
> immediate, up-to-date, and easy to understand. HTML
> FORMs are naturally extensible, can link to newer
> versions, and can even leverage mobile code execution
> for optionally enforcing pre-conditions on the client
> side. This model strikes me as many leaps ahead of
> WSDL (except in terms of describing more complex data
> structures).

Only arguable if there is a standard solution for REST, having an HTML
version of word documents is not (IMO) progression.  If its always
ad-hoc then its a massive step backwards.

>
> > 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.
>
> I think XForms likely is a direction REST will go to
> formally describe more complex data structures in
> hypermedia. Or the Atom publishing protocol for
> handling categorized, timeseries data.

So right now I think everyone is agreed that this is a big gap in REST.
>
> Cheers
> Stu
>
> __________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
> 

Reply via email to