On 12/10/2009 06:31 PM, Pavel Shramov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 06:23:14PM +0100, Romain François wrote:
>> What about then if you want to control the kind of output that is
>> returned back (pb or json). I would then add&encoding=pb or
>> &encoding=json. How do you do this ?
> Everything is invented before us [1] :)
Fair enough. I guess we could set Accept-encoding for that.
> To be fair in my implementation I send response encoded as request.
> Request encoding is read from Content-Type header and defaults to PB.
>
>> I don't have any strong opinions. I think the best format is :
>>
>> /base/url/{service}?method={method}
>>
>> where "service" is the service full name, and "method" the method name
>> within the service.
> So we have both URL and query encoding at once :)
The rationale is this: it seems about right for a service to be bound to
an url (whether the url uses the actual service full name or soime other
key as per kenton's emails) and the method smells more like a parameter.
It is easy enough for me to encode the request in your format if I
wanted to be able to interchange with your server, but is it not better
to all use the same ...
> Pavel
> --
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.3
--
Romain Francois
Professional R Enthusiast
+33(0) 6 28 91 30 30
http://romainfrancois.blog.free.fr
|- http://tr.im/Gq7i : ohloh
|- http://tr.im/FtUu : new package : highlight
`- http://tr.im/EAD5 : LondonR slides
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" 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/protobuf?hl=en.
