On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 1:53 AM, Paul Sandoz <Paul.Sandoz_at_sun.com> wrote:
> 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?
Forgot to reply: yes, I think it does. Thank you for summarizing this.
-+ Tatu +-