On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 4:39 AM, Jerome Louvel <jerome.lou...@noelios.com>wrote:

> However, for communication with GWT, it is indeed a better idea to rely on
> JSON. I have also been working on reusing the 'transparent' serialization
> of
> beans between Restlet/Server and Restlet/GWT. This serialization is used in
> GWT-RPC but can be reused in a RESTful way. This isn't quite ready yet, but
> hopefully for Restlet 2.0 M4, I'll have something more stable.

I've already said that this is very cool, but it does make we wonder ...
Isn't this sort of, um, cheating? A representation that is coupled to a
particular client/service pair? Another few steps over the edge and we're
back to RPC-style services.

I guess the saving grace is that Restlet makes it easy, or even trivial, to
provide other representations in addition to the one that's optimized for
common use, and RPC-style frameworks can't offer that at all.

> As David mentioned, this could be complementary to exposing Atom
> representations of your resources. Finally, I'm not sure if you need to
> support the full AtomPub standard or just the Atom XML one.

Hmm, the wind is going out of my sails. I started by recognizing that
AtomPub seemed to be a natural fit for my domain, and now I'm looking at
JSON/serialized beans and "optional" plain Atom feeds. (Optional in the
sense that my main applications wouldn't need them,  because they'd be
happily talking JSON.)

Anybody have anything encouraging to say about why I shouldn't just stick
with my existing DWR application? (www.directwebremoting.org)



Reply via email to