On Mar 21, 2006, at 8:55 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
On 2006/03/20, at 12:20 PM, Ryan King wrote:
Also, html forms could be useful for documenting the parameters
available on rest resources. Mixed with microformats, as above,
this could be a very useful way to document a rest api. It would
cover much the same territory as WADL, but in a web-native way
which can be very useful to developers, as the forms are a
functional sandbox.
Is that really the case? A form seems almost like a choreography to
me (although I'm fairly ignorant of that world); i.e., it tells you
how to do one task, rather than document the whole interface.
E.g., if I have a resource that accepts GET, POST, PUT and DELETE,
the form is probably only going to tickle one of those methods...
You could put together a set of forms that covered all of the
ground, of course, but for some tasks, that's pretty clunky.
You're right, a given form will only cover one of the verbs. Of
course, but going this route we're talking about low-rest (or two-
verb rest), so PUT and DELETE are already out of consideration. As
for the other verbs, it would certainly be neccessary to have a
collection of forms to completely document an interface.
Is it clunky? yeah, probably. Just throwing out ideas here, though.
-rk
_______________________________________________
microformats-rest mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-rest
