Hi
On 14/03/12 15:51, Marek Potociar wrote:
> Hi Sergey,
>
> FWIW, this is not an attempt to force a convention upon the community. The goal is to just provide a fall-back
> convention when a custom mapping is not (yet) specified to make life of JAX-RS developers easier.
Yes, I actually did mean that too, but also meaning there could be a
(reasonable) expectation that the fall-back convention like the proposed
one can in turn lead to users kind of adopting /webapi/ for their own
Application paths...
Some users might be sensitive to the 'api' bit, but may be this will go
okay for all...
> IOW, certain cases
> where a JAX-RS implementation would refuse to deploy earlier due to an unresolved application mapping would start
> working with this convention in place.
>
Sure, makes sense
Sergey
> Marek
>
> On 03/14/2012 04:45 PM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>> Hi Santiago
>> On 14/03/12 15:37, Santiago Pericas-Geertsen wrote:
>>> Hello Experts,
>>>
>>> We've done some work in Section 2.3.2 to better explain the integration with the Servlet container and its
>>> pluggability framework. Unfortunately, there are still some cases --in the absence of @ApplicationPath-- in which a
>>> servlet mapping must be specified in a DD.
>>>
>>> Shall we define a default servlet mapping for JAX-RS 2.0? JSF uses "/faces/*", for example. How about "/webapi/*"
>>> for us?
>> I've no experience with JSF, I'm assuming the users are not calling /faces directly/explicitly.
>> '/webapi/*' sounds ok as far as the name of uri pattern is concerned, may be "/rs/*" is also possible, but IMHO users
>> will in most cases expect some custom mappings ? Unless we expect that some convention will be formed by the community,
>> similar to "/services/*" with SOAP
>>
>> Cheers, Sergey
>>
>>>
>>> -- Santiago