Hi Rob, Thanks for your response.
It's reassuring to know that other people have had similar experiences with . I've opted for the slightly more verbose route option which works fine. Thanks, Matt Rob wrote: > > I was starting to answer this and realized I was making an assumption. > WHY don't you want to do this? (Too many routes? Don't like the URI > hierarchy that's emerging?) > > I find that I've had a hard time implementing complete template-based, > page-based UIs entirely on the server without making a mess. I think > this is because I'm just conflating too many UI concerns in one layer. > If I have a GWT, AJAX, Flex, Swing or other rich client UI, the REST > back end remains clean and simple. > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Matt<@.com> wrote: >> I don't really want to do this if I can avoid it. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > ://..org/ds/.do?=4447&=2362455 > > -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Designing-restlet-applications-tp3084513p3097241.html Sent from the Restlet Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------ http://restlet.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=4447&dsMessageId=2363051
