Hi Markus,
Do you think the goals i presented are reasonable?
On Feb 17, 2010, at 7:28 PM, Markus Karg wrote:
> Paul,
>
> About: " Note that i am not interested in abstract philosophical
> discussions, nor interested in reverse engineering Roy's thesis, on
> what is the hypertext constraint [*]. I personally find such
> discussions very distracting, time-consuming, and are better suited
> for the rest-discuss email list (which i lurk on but do not
> participate in because i do not have the time)."
>
> In short: Then skip my postings. ;-)
>
:-) that would be inappropriate, i read everything on the list.
I just will try and avoid engaging (no matter how tempting!) in such
discussions that i consider are more suited to rest-discuss. I simply
do not have the time. I need to spend time helping Jersey developers
with other issues and fixing stuff. So my time on hypertext can be
better spent on the more concrete aspects of hypertext API details,
examples and pointing out factual errors with specifications, without
getting too deeply entangled in the latter!
So i am happy to leave such discussions up to other people on the list
and i am not suggesting that such discussions should not happen. Such
discussions can help towards reaching the goals 1 and 2 (one aim of
goal 2 is so we do not have to repeat such discussions ad-infinitum).
My preference is that such discussions should occur with goals 1 & 2
in mind: that they should lead to more concrete results in the form of
examples and prototypes.
Hope that clarifies matters a little more,
Paul.
> In long: I agree that discussions can become annoying and
> theoretical discussion are better fit in rest-discuss. But I have to
> disagree with you assumption that we all have a well understanding
> of what REST is, and as we are a community, we should try to change
> that. "A number", as you wrote, is just not enough to speak from
> "community". As this discussion perfectly showed, there in fact are
> fundamental differences and shortcomings in what we understand what
> REST or HATEOAS is, even at myself, and I am doing REST since years
> as you know. Those discussions are needed sometimes to align our
> views and understandings of what the target of this project is, and
> how tightly it will follow the unique definition of REST or better a
> practical approach possibly far aside. As you see, by this
> discussion I got convinced that the approach to use the "Link"
> header is not so bad and I am thankful for everybody that helped
> convincing me, including but not limited to Roy, Craig, Marc, You,
> Santiago, Jan, etc. I am sure that lots of people followed the
> discussion, even the philosophic parts, with great interest. And I
> am convinced that it is very good for the project if the community
> is discussing heavily, even things you and Marc already discussed
> long before. I don't like the idea of a community that just nod
> through a given proposal provided by a stakeholder. It might be the
> case that you disliked the discussion, but hey, others enjoyed it or
> just abstained if they did not. Just skip my postings if you have no
> time or mood to read them; this is not your personal email address,
> it is a community forum in the end. But if you like to read them, I
> am happy if you declare your position and enlight me with your
> knowledge. :-)
>
> Regards
> Markus
>
> From: Paul.Sandoz_at_Sun.COM [mailto:Paul.Sandoz_at_Sun.COM]
> Sent: Mittwoch, 17. Februar 2010 10:53
> To: users_at_jersey.dev.java.net
> Subject: [Jersey] Goals for hypertext constraint support
>
> On Feb 17, 2010, at 12:36 AM, Tatu Saloranta wrote:
>
> Apologies for beating what may sound like dead horse, but given how
> controversial use of seemingly simple terms is, it's necessary to
> look beyond acronyms. What are we trying to do here?
>
>
> Goal 1: to design and implement APIs for the client and server side
> that make it easier, than it currently is in Jersey, for a developer
> to apply the hypertext constraint to their RESTful application.
>
> It is the responsibility of the developer to understand the
> hypertext constraint and what properties it induces in their
> application architecture.
>
> Goal 2: it is the responsibility of the Jersey team (community?
> although i do not think i can speak for the community, only for the
> team) to help guide developers with support, examples and
> documentation.
>
> Goal 3: any work we do in Jersey will be input to any future JAX-RS
> 2.0 effort.
>
> To achieve these goals we need to look at existing examples and
> develop prototypes to evaluate what is the best way to make
> progress. We don't want to limit the API to one particular "pattern"
> of hypertext constraint applicable to applications. We want to
> gather a number of patterns based on the examples and use-cases.
>
> Does the above help clarify matters?
>
>
> Note that i am not interested in abstract philosophical discussions,
> nor interested in reverse engineering Roy's thesis, on what is the
> hypertext constraint [*]. I personally find such discussions very
> distracting, time-consuming, and are better suited for the rest-
> discuss email list (which i lurk on but do not participate in
> because i do not have the time).
>
> Paul.
>
> [*] I think a number of us on this list have a very good
> understanding on what the hypertext constraint is and what it aims
> to achieve.
>