I have my issues with the AWWW v1.

>From a resource modeling perspective, I'd like the option of
navigating to a resource through multiple paths, e.g.:

http://www.example.com/parts/sku1234/orders/order56789
http://www.example.com/customers/cust23457/orders/order56789

These are not arbitrary URIs. They also are not especially opaque
because the path provides semantic information.

Now, as Stefan recommends, both of these URIs should be redirected to
a single URL, e.g.:

http://www.example.com/orders/order56789

But I much prefer this URL to something truly opaque like:

http://www/example.com/123453456234511111

Anne

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 24/04/2008, Stefan Tilkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > 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.
>
>  Now that make sense, but surely then the statement above doesn't need
>  the words "arbitrarily different" which add nothing except confusion
>  (IMO) to the definition. It then becomes a much simpler, and
>  understandable, statement which offers guidance. Its not a MUST NOT
>  but its a strong guidance.
>
>  Steve
>
>
>  >
>  > 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
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  

Reply via email to