On 19/12/2007, at 10:14 AM, Hugh Winkler wrote:
I'm uncomfortable with prescribing how to construct URIs (sec. 4), aren't you?
Why? HTML forms does it, and they're pretty successful.
It takes control of the URI namespace away from the server.
Just as with forms, this only specifies a format that's meaningful if the server chooses to use it; it doesn't foist itself upon the URL.
You can get the effect you want by POSTing an entity containing the FIQL string (give it mime type application/fiql say) and allowing the server to respond directly with the result, or return 303 to the URI of a cacheable representation. Let the server construct the URI.
POSTing a query works, but for whatever reason, people don't like the added step. The draft doesn't rule that out, of course, but most people will want to put it in a URI; it's up to the server to decide how it wants to do it. It would make sense to define a media type for a FIQL query if people want to do this, though; I'll add that to the next draft.
Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
