On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 10:18 PM, restkat <pansonm_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> I’ve been using JAX-RS and like the simplicity and marshaling of parameters
> and responses.
>
> I'm reading about how to design the URI space and also like the simple,
> resource centric approach.
>
> But when it comes to performing actions from an HTTP client that do not
> pertain to CRUD operations against a resource, am I supposed to use a
> different technology? That doesn't make any sense. Now I have JAX-RS for the
> resource centric requests and maybe POX over HTTP for invoking actions. Two
> different frameworks to maintain...this would be an abomination from a
> maintenance and testing perspective.
>
...
>
> Certainly you could use JAX-RS to expose the interface, but it wouldn't be
> REST and everything I read says that this is wrong.
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong in using JAX-RS implementation
like Jersey purely for binding URLs and other HTTP pieces with code to
invoke, and to simplify binding, content negotiation.
Question, rather, is whether REST model is the way to go or not; and
after that higher-level decision, which tool(s) to choose.
I can see Jersey working just fine RPC style access, or REST-like combinations.
Put another way: while many may argue that REST is better way to go
for any given use case, fewer (if any) would object to using
general-purpose framework. Even if that "R" in there did come from
term REST. :-)
-+ Tatu +-