[OTDev] encoding accept header MIME types in URI
Christoph Helma helma at in-silico.chTue Jan 11 12:40:48 CET 2011
- Previous message: [OTDev] encoding accept header MIME types in URI
- Next message: [OTDev] encoding accept header MIME types in URI
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 01:24:45PM +0200, Nina Jeliazkova wrote: > > > > Well, I don't like the extension approach at all, because it is not > > aligned with the REST idea that an URI is one resource, having different > > representations. Adding extensions means these are effectively different > > resources , and have different URIs (even it will be hard to tell within RDF > > representation these are the same objects!) > > > > URI parameters are little bit better (not ideal), in the sense the URI is > > still the same. > > > > > One more argument against extension came to my mind after sending the email > - it will make AA much more complicated, as we'll have to register multiple > URIs about the same object into OpenSSO system ... > >From a user/client point of view I would prefer the extension approach, because it is - simple - intuitive - saves a lot of typing - downloads produce file names with correct extensions I do not see a contradiction to REST priciples as extensions are just another (commonly used) convention to specify the mime-type. Internally the services should work of course with the base URI (e.g. for AA) as the extension indicates another format, not another resource. Best regards, Christoph
- Previous message: [OTDev] encoding accept header MIME types in URI
- Next message: [OTDev] encoding accept header MIME types in URI
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Development mailing list