On 11/10/2012 10:23 AM, Federico "Lox" Lucignano wrote:
> Handling wikitext in a structured way is an interesting concept, as far as
> I know the team working on the new visual editor (another joint project
> between the Foundation and Wikia) has built a "parsoid" that does something
> pretty much similar if not the same, that functionality could be exposed as
> an API resource, for more information feel free to drop them an email (I'm
> not sure there's a dedicated mailing list).
> 
> That being said, it would be of great interest to get implementation
> details about the suggestions focusing on the concept that introducing all
> the stated goals/benefits/features would be easy without introducing
> breaking changes, it's unclear on which basis that assessment is done in
> the complete absence of technical details (all the documentation published
> so far is made up just of notes listing concepts by name).
> 
> On a side note, a simpler, normalized URI schema (URL is too restrictive,
> in the end REST is not at all about HTTP) would make it possible to also
> fully exploit OAuth's scopes and add a caching layer such as Squid/Varnish
> maintaining the possibility of purging when needed (that's not really
> doable when the URI schema is too relaxed).

Just wanted to share the latest status on this from Wikia:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API/REST_proposal/status

"*   Finishing evaluating ROA as the underlying REST architecture for
the RFC
*   Defined the possible format for scope-defining parameters (both
hierarchical and single-level)
*   Started identifying the core set of resources to be exposed via the
REST interface, evaluating overloaded Post as a way to allow for 3rd
party extensions to a resource
*   Completed the outline for a first revision of a protocol-agnostic
router/dispatcher model along with the core set of classes of the API
framework

Next step: finalize the first set of docs and move the discussion to a
larger group including API designer and Tech leads."

On a completely separate note:
I just saw that
http://www.slideshare.net/DominikRenzel/todays-top-restful-services-and-why-they-are-not-restful
on page 6 grades MediaWiki and other popular applications/services on
how RESTful they are.

I'm assuming that red/pink/light green/dark green correlates to
"noncompliant/not very compliant/kinda compliant/compliant".

Red:
Formal Description
Links in Representations
Forms in Representations
Resource Types
Versioned Endpoint
Format Selection

Pink:
Parameter Sources

Light green:
HTTP Method Override

Dark green:
Scoping Information
Meaningful HTTP Status
Use of HTTP Methods

http://www.springerlink.com/index/42307200X642M240.pdf has the full
paper in case people want to look at that.

-- 
Sumana Harihareswara
Engineering Community Manager
Wikimedia Foundation

_______________________________________________
Mediawiki-api mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-api

Reply via email to