Just to clarify, 1:1 mapping can mean any of the following things:
1. REST URL format (os:MakeRequest href="/people/@me")
2. Key/value params in URL format (os:MakeRequest
href="/[EMAIL PROTECTED]"), very similar to 1
3. attribute/value pairs in XML element (os:PersonRequest person="@me')
4. JSON blob in XML (os:PersonRequest method="person" params="{person:
@me}">
etc...I have strong opinions on which alternatives are better, but I think this is a tangential discusison to the requirements. On 9/25/08, Evan Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was hoping not to get down to this level of detail yet - we have 6 other > requirements to discuss and this discussion keeps overwhelming all other > threads. > > I feel pretty strongly that the only actual requirement is a 1:1 mapping to > REST/RPC. We might decide to have this be the identity mapping, but that can > be part of the "what's the best way to implement the requirements" > discussion. > > Evan > > On 9/25/08, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Scott Seely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> It looks like the OSML spec has the person/people stuff figured out. >>> For person/people, there is some information at >>> http://wiki.opensocial-templates.org/index.php?title=OpenSocial_Markup#.3Cos:PersonRequest.3E >>> . >>> >>> >>> >>> <os:PersonRequest key="Viewer" id="VIEWER" >>> fields="name,id,thumbnailUrl,books"/> >>> >>> >>> >>> <os:PeopleRequest key="PagedFriends" idSpec="VIEWER_FRIENDS" page="2" >>> pageSize="20"/> >>> >>> >>> >>> We wouldn't need a new syntax for Person, People, Activities, or AppData >>> as there is a different mapping independent of REST/XRDS. >>> >>> >>> >>> Does this solve the problem at hand? Is there a shortcoming in this >>> solution that I'm not seeing? >>> >> >> The problem with this solution is that it's a 6th mapping for social data >> (JSON-RPC, XML-RPC, JSON-REST, ATOM-REST, javascript APIs, and now this). >> >> That's not really reasonable to expect developers to learn, especially >> since different sites are going to support different things. Many people are >> already frustrated at inconsistencies between implementations. >> >> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "OpenSocial and Gadgets Specification Discussion" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/opensocial-and-gadgets-spec?hl=en >> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- >> >> >
