Re the whole "what should an endpoint url look like" thing - I had a similar discussion with a user re protobuf-net; in the end it was quicker to just *default* to the former (since it doesn't need any extra specification), but *support* both - so the code detects key strings in the supplied url and works some magic.
i.e. if I give it the endpoint: "http://foo/foocorp"; then it uses "http://foo/foocorp/myservice/somemethod"; but if I give it the endpoint "http://foo/foocorp?svc={service}&act={action} " it uses "http://foo/foocorp?svc=myservice&action=somemethod"; And so I can officially say "I don't care" about this discussion - either suits me without any code-changes ;-p Marc > So xxx?method=method&service=service is more close to me. > > > 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 ... > It is so we'll trying to find common point... > > As last resort we may define set of calling conventions for clients. > > Pavel > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Protocol Buffers" group. > To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en. > > > -- Regards, Marc -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
