--- Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In response to Stuart's remark:
>
> > > WHY, for example, I may want to have a URI
> > > for everything interesting instead of just embedding an arbitrary
> > > context-specific identifier in my XML document.
>
> To be RESTful, the XML document would include the URI of the resource
> of interest. By naming the resource and using hypermedia to reference
> it, you get the benefits of the Web. (Hypermedia as the engine of
> state.) It's an incredibly powerful feature.
Hi Anne,
I do understand that, (I'm giving an OOPSLA tutorial with Mark on
REST this October, so I hope I do :) -- I was referring to how the
tools don't make this apparent to the developer.
There's a theory out there, in enterprise land, that developers only
understand what their tools, languages, and libraries present to them.
I'm don't really I believe in this theory, but clearly enterprise
vendors go through great lengths to hide the innards of (for example)
WS-* for example with their chosen abstractions. My comment was that
the same thing hasn't really happened for REST toolkits & frameworks --
they don't emphasize URI.
cheers
Stu
____________________________________________________________________________________Ready
for the edge of your seat?
Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
