See to me it's the most interesting part, maybe you are extrapolating
to far or maybe we're not extrapolating far enough.
Why its of particular interest to me is because we have to put the
same mechanics in the php version, and we don't have any abdera type
solutions there, so it's very important to me to try to be aware of
any snafu's i may have overlooked so far.
I personally thought the intention of the spec was to be able to
produce the same kind of information, in, well currently 2 formats,
but that might expand into more formats in the future, so that app
developers with a certain preference (json or atom) can have the
information as they want.
I didn't see any specific mentions of supporting all of http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4287.txt
and http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5023.txt so -my assumption- was that
that wasn't the goal of the spec, and hence nor of shindig.
I think at least we've come close to defining where the difference of
opinion is when it comes to the 2 different java based
implementations, you feel strongly that we should have full Atom
Publishing Protocol & Atom Syndication Format support, where i think I
(and probably also Cassie) just want to support what's in the spec,
without being implementing everything from those RFC's.
I think that does bring the discussion back to the spec list though,
should the Atom part of RESTful API be completely rfc4287 and rfc5023
compliant and support all it's features?
-- Chris
On Jul 12, 2008, at 1:02 AM, David Primmer wrote:
I've posted quite a few long emails to this list and the spec asking
these questions and had very few substantive replies. I also don't
think I've been making absolute statements as you claim and I'm sorry
I've given you that impression. There doesn't seem to be much serious
interest in implementing rfc 5023 and 4287 and so that's why I
suggested maybe we not have such a strict requirement on it or have it
be so prominent in the spec. The spec never says "this is an atom
rfc-compliant service", but instead says stuff like "use an AtomPub
POST" or "use AtomPub optimistic concurrency" so maybe I was just
extrapolating too far.
Maybe to others, I'm splitting hairs, but I think there's a big
difference between supporting atom pub and supporting some
newly-defined restful service that has xml and json payload, but I
don't feel it's a good use of m time writing long explanations of the
differences. There are rfc's that do that.
