[jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: I'd like to remove _at_Uri

From: Jan Algermissen <>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:34:50 +0100

On 11.02.2013, at 14:28, Bill Burke <> wrote:

> Injection of WebTargets require the configuration of an underlying Client. Client configuration will often require SSL configuration (truststore). Even without SSL, there's connection TTL, connection pooling configuration, and other things.
> I'm not a big fan of having functionality that requires vendor-specific configuration in order to work. This is why I think we should remove support for @Uri. I'm pretty sure it would be possible to write a CDI extension if users wanted to do this, but I think this is beyond the scope of the JAX-RS spec.

I think so, too.

Even more so, from my 'pure REST' POV: Clients should discover URIs at run time. The only known-up-front URIs should be those few entry URIs into a system....and those I'd really want in the configuration, not in the code :-)

@Uri is nice for quick tryouts, though.

Having said that: What was the original idea to have it?


> --
> Bill Burke
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat