On 9 juil, 17:18, ivar vasara <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jul 9, 7:02 am, Stefan Bachert <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I guess directly supporting RESTful/Soap does not make much sense > > because of SOP and other security topics. > > With browsers becoming more aware and supporting sources from multiple > sources, SOP is not so much an issue. > > > At this time I would recommend always to use GWT-RPC to communicate. > > From the server SOP does not apply and you can access any webservice > > you like. > > That is a sad state of affairs and ties the client to a GWT-RPC > speaking backend. > > I know many people are impressed by the flexibility and power of GWT > as a client side technology (especially on html5 enabled mobile > devices!!!), but would like to use alternative tools on the server > (eg: rails). Proper REST support would really ease the way for > developers to create cleanly separated clients using GWT and backends > using whatever RESTful tools they want.
What do you call "proper REST support"? Which kind of API would you like to see added to GWT? I'm curious. As REST is strongly tied to media types, you'd have you register media type "processors", but that's not really different from what you can already do today with RequestBuilder (without the need for GWT generators, contrary to GWT- RPC, unless you'd like something like XStream- or Jackson-like serialization on the client-side), so I wonder. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
