Hi Roberto,
I believe the best generalization of the API is making available a
semantic model of the app in Java code, not just WADL.
Regards
Guilherme Silveira
Caelum | Ensino e Inovação
http://www.caelum.com.br/
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Roberto Chinnici
<roberto.chinnici_at_oracle.com> wrote:
> We're not voting on anything yet.
>
> I'd like to request a clarification re "MetaData API so that extensions to
> RESTEasy can browse through the JAX-RS resources defined".
>
> Are we talking about a Java API so that an extension (a piece of Java code
> that is either part of the same application or deployed as a shared library
> somehow) can discover/enumerate/inspect the resources that exist in the
> application itself? Or are we talking about an HTTP client remotely
> accessing the application to discover its resources?
>
> The WADL suggestion seems to go in the latter direction, but maybe it was
> simply triggered by the the word "browse" in the feature description.
>
> On 3/9/11 10:58 AM, Markus KARG wrote:
>>
>> Did I miss something? Are we already in the voting phase? How to vote?
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Bill Burke [mailto:bburke_at_redhat.com]
>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 9. März 2011 17:25
>>> To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
>>> Subject: [jsr339-experts] Re: Fwd: Re: [Resteasy-developers] JAX-RS 2.0
>>> features you want?
>>>
>>> -1 WADL. Not a big fan of it. Encourages WS-* mindset.
>>>
>>> On 3/9/11 10:40 AM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Bill,
>>>>
>>>> On 03/09/2011 03:11 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> - MetaData API so that extensions to RESTEasy can browse through the
>>>
>>> JAX-RS resources defined
>>>>
>>>> Of the top of my head, it seems to me that this one may be rather
>>>
>>> implementation-specific. Would be useful if you could
>>>>
>>>> identify a few use cases where e.g. use of WADL is not enough.
>>>>
>>>> Marek
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Bill Burke
>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>>> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>
>