Christian Zagrodnick wrote:
a couple of weeks ago there was some discussion about the skin/layer
support for XML-RPC which I implemented without asking (shame on me). As
some time has passed now everybody could have some fresh thoughts about it.
Let me first summarise:
* Skin and layers should be seen as typing the request.
* There are no general objections against having layers for XML-RPC.
* There are objections against using ++skin++ for XML-RPC, ++api++ would
I don't really have time to read this whole discussion, but note that
Grok's REST support uses ++rest++<protocolname> and then provides a rest
layer (for that protocol) to the request. That sounds quite similar to
what you are proposing for XMLRPC.
It's still ugly as POST and GET need to be handled by something else
than PUT and DELETE, unfortunately; you can't use a different publisher
(publication? whatever the name is for this handle) for GET and POST as
the interface isn't set at the point it kicks in.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -