On 12/12/06, Jan Algermissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jan:
>  >>  I am saying that you need standard mime types. There are currently
>  >>  none that
>  >>  handle the sort of thing you are talking about.
>
>  Steve:
>  >Exactly my point, this is a gap in REST as it stands at the moment.
>  >I'm glad we agree.
>
>  Umm...what is the issue here? Are you suggesting that with WS-* you get 
> anything like this? Where are all the standardized APIs????

You mean like the industry vertical ones? There are quite a few out
there these days.  And part of the objective of WS-* isn't to create
single interfaces across the world, its to enable businesses to
collaborate around what they want which means establishing interfaces
for just those interactions.

If REST restricted its vision, as I've understood what you have
claimed for it, to be more targetted and less grand and established
that media types are between participants rather than global then it
would sound more sensible to me.


>
>  You need to do the same standardization effort for both styles and I claim 
> that defining a media type is a lot easier than defining an API.

But that isn't a claim backed up by experience of distributed systems
which has been successful via APIs but you are saying the new way
_could_ be easier but don't have the proof point. You might be right,
but I need data to back that opinion up.

>
>  (The design space is smaller, less things to decide).

An ontology for everything is not a small space.

>
>  Really, I am totally not getting your point. Can you explain?

You talk of standardized MIME types, a theoretical thing, being the
"solution", I doubt that we will get to a complete ontology of MIME
types that is standardised across the globe and therefore REST
currently doesn't have a solution beyond partner to partner
negotation, thus meaning that clients are bound to a specific server
implementation as that has the MIME types it understands.

WS-* is further along in the standardisation of industry verticals and
this is liable to accelerate in the next 12 months.  I'm just not
seeing the business case for them re-doing the effort for REST.



>
>  Jan
>                    

Reply via email to