On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Paul McCallick <[email protected]> wrote:
> This came in on InfoQ today: > > http://www.infoq.com/news/2011/01/WCF-HTTP > > <http://www.infoq.com/news/2011/01/WCF-HTTP>It's very timely for us, as > we're planning to abandon WCF in favor of straight ASP.NET MVC. I don't > see the value add of WCF when all you're trying to do is expose a REST > interface. Does anyone see the point in this? > I think a few links are sufficient: http://deadprogrammersociety.blogspot.com/2007/10/sinatra-ruby-web-framework-and-why-it.html http://groups.google.com/group/net-http-abstractions http://rubylearning.com/blog/2009/03/20/interview-ryan-tomayko-on-sinatra/ Why do I reference Sinatra? It's the oldest of the new form of web frameworks coming out, and the WCF Web APIs align more tightly with it. MVC is certainly a valid approach. However, if you want to do REST and not just REST-ish, MVC doesn't quite cut the mustard, at least not without some hacks. Ryan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.
