Hi Markus,
An interface with one method that receives one string and returns another is
not a complex one in my point of view. Its only more complex than a
interface with no methods.
Although 80% is surely great, 100% with 10 extra lines of spec sounds better
for me. 3 for the interface less than 7 for explaining how it works.
Of course, this is the interface for the case in discussion. It could be
improved in several ways.
Regards
On 10/04/2011 4:59 PM, "Markus KARG" <markus_at_headcrashing.eu> wrote:
Guilherme,
with the target "CoC" im mind, looking at the *average user* of JAX-RS, I
cannot find a better word than "rocket science": If a *user* would be clever
enough to implement such an interface, he wouldn't have a need for CoC IMHO,
since CoC in my experience is most appreciated not by *lazy* people but more
by the "not-so-skilled" ones (in other words, users like CoC because they
don't need to understand what's going on or what the correct syntax would be
like ["it works somehow magically"], not because they do understand how to
configure but just don't want to type the stuff in). That's why I think for
*those* people (in my experience: the majority of average users) to get the
largest benefit of our CoC efforts, the need for understanding such a
complex interface would be experienced as being "rocket science" so they
wouldn't use it at all. But if people don't use it largely, there is no
justification to provide a standard for it. So it could be a really useful
extension of your framework, but I just don't see that it is so wide-spread
needed that we should define a standard for it. In my opinion, our CoC
target should be to define that 80% of use cases that people would love to
see a simple "best CoC guess" built into JAX-RS, not to define an API for
the other 20% experts that just are too lazy to type. But that is just *my*
opinion, maybe the other experts think different.
Regards
Markus
*From:* guilherme.silveira_at_gmail.com [mailto:guilherme.silveira_at_gmail.com] *On
Behalf Of *Guilherme Silveira
*Sent:* Samstag, 9. April 2011 23:27
To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
Subject: [jsr339-experts] Re: Annotations CoC [Was: Convention Over
Configuration]
If its out of scope I can understand. But I disagree about its difficulties,
or even rocket sciwnce. Extracting simple interfaces should be easier to do
than agreeing whether a rest consumer should be bound to its server
interface.
Regards
>
> On 09/04/2011 4:34 PM, "Markus KARG" <markus_at_headcrashing.eu> wrote:
>
> While obvious...