On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 6:55 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I briefly read the draft. My impression is that it tries to come up some >> sort of poor-man's Web Service support over HTTP using RPC style (tunneling >> the invocations over HTTP). What are the advantages over SOAP/HTTP or >> JSONRPC/HTTP? I'm wondering if it would be better to focus on the REST style >> by mapping HTTP methods into a set of business operations that deal with >> resources. >> >> Thanks, >> Raymond >> >> From: ant elder >> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 3:50 AM >> To: dev@tuscany.apache.org >> Subject: Draft OASIS spec for binding.http >> >> >> >> A draft spec for an HTTP binding has been posted to the OASIS bindings >> mailing list - >> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/200810/msg00078.html >> >> It has some interesting things such as using the new wireFormat element >> and the suggestion that you could extend that for atom and json support. I'm >> interested in doing an implementation of this spec, anyone interested in >> helping? >> >> ...ant >> > > I think this will fall into the different strokes for different folks > category. If OASIS pick this up then people will want to use this binding so > we should look at it. We can then probably give OASIS some good feedback on > how to improve the spec. In the PHP SCA implementation we had a similar > "REST" binding and people quite liked it. Don't have an opinion on basing > the Web2.0 bindings on it. > > Simon > +1 to that, implementing specs while they're being drafted at OASIS and giving feedback to the spec guys is something we supposed to be doing isn't it? ...ant
