Fabio Mancinelli wrote: > On 4 mars 08, at 16:23, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > >>> There is a long debate about REST vs. SOAP (the comparison here is a >>> bit wrong since REST is not a protocol), anyway REST and WS à la SOAP >>> are two ways of doing WebServices that exploit rather opposite >>> paradigms. So definitely I would say that we DO NOT want to do >>> SOAP! :) >> No, I would say that we'd rather have REST at this point as it has >> more >> direct benefits than SOAP, since REST does not need special tools to >> be >> used by simple users, while SOAP is mostly for machines. >> >> But I think that this project should not be done this way. It will >> mean >> that we'll have the application login in 4 places (struts, xmlrpc, >> gwt, >> reast). I'd rather we created a distinct application logic layer which >> can be used by all these communication interfaces (this is what they >> are, communication interfaces, and they should not contain logic). >> If we >> do this, then adding a SOAP protocol would be as simple as creating >> the >> listeners and the bridge to the application logic (2 weeks of work at >> most?). And it will be a little easier to update all the protocols >> at once. > > Not sure of understanding what you say here. > The XMLRPC login already uses, for example, the > xwiki.getAuthService().authenticate method. > Isn't this already the application logic layer you are talking about? > Why do you need another?
Sorry, my typo, I mean application LOGIC, not login. > In the REST approach we would call this very same method in order to > authenticate a request on a URI > that is "protected", for example a PUT on a http://site/space/page. > > But maybe I have misunderstood something. > > Anyway, what is done in the "backend" doesn't prevent the fact that > you must > expose a URI space for addressing xwiki resources. This URI space > engineering is the first step and doesn't involve implementation > details [1]. > >> Also, this should be done in the new component-based architecture. >> > Of course. > But I was not talking about implementation details in my previous email. > >> How's that for a nice SoC project? >> > Actually I have a problem with another project proposal... > > I think there is some overlapping between the WebDAV and RESTful XWiki > proposal because the description in > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/WebDAVService > is exactly what I called "resource namespace engineering" in a > previous message, and it's an integral part (actually it is the > foundation) of the RESTful XWiki proposal. > > In fact for the RESTful XWiki we need a "view" of the XWiki system in > order to make XWiki elements addressable through URIs that can be > referenced by HTTP methods GET, PUT, POST, DELETE and, in case, by > WebDAV methods PROPPATCH, PROPFIND, MKCOL, COPY, MOVE, LOCK, UNLOCK. > Whenever a method is applicable, of course. > > So maybe the WebDAV and RESTful XWiki are actually the *same* proposal. > > WDYT? > > Cheers, > Fabio > > [1] http://www.infoq.com/articles/rest-introduction > > > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
