+1 for extension based Aloha Paddy Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-----Original Message----- From: "Bertrand Delacretaz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:06:56 To:[email protected] Subject: Re: microsling: extension vs. mime-type script resolution On Nov 19, 2007 8:57 PM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 18, 2007 5:01 PM, David Nuescheler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ...Personally, I would rather just go for a straight, more direct > > extension-based > > resolution than engaging in the whole mimetype business.... > > +1 Agreed, IIRC it was me who introduced the mime-type based thing, in my quest to expose REST ideas. But after reading the debate, and especially Marcel's excellent vnd.ms-excel.esp vs. xsl.esp example, I agree that looking up the script based on the request's extension (or using GET as the script name if no extension) is easier to understand, and less risky. And if the Accept header is used (which IMHO is sometimes a good idea when the client is a machine, not a browser), the script can access it as needed. I'll create a JIRA issue for this change to extension-based script resolution (unless the tangent taken by Jukka brings other ideas, I haven't fully read that part of the thread yet ;-) -Bertrand
