On Apr 24, 2008, at 7:00 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
> On 22/04/2008, Nick Gall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> > For example, the AWWW v1 contains the following practice that is  
> not strictly required by REST:
> >
> >
> > Good practice: Avoiding URI aliases -- A URI owner SHOULD NOT  
> associate arbitrarily different
> > URIs with the same resource.
>
> I've wondered about this phrase. Given that arbitrarily means sort of
> random or on a whim it is an odd phrase as it implies you can do it
> deliberately if you want but don't be random about it. Given that
> URIs can (should?) be opaque its hard to see what it is actually
> forbidding.
>
>

The point here is mainly that the abilities for caching are hurt if  
different URIs are used for the same thing. I would consider it  
preferable to rarely use multiple URIs for the same resource, and if  
so, redirect the aliases to the 'canonical' one.

Stefan
--
Stefan Tilkov, http://www.innoq.com/blog/st/



> I've never actually seen a system in which people did random
> assignment of important objects under different names, except of
> course in C when people screwed up their pointers.
>
> Steve
>
> >
> [snip]
> > -- Nick
> >
> >
> >
>
> 


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to