Re: Welcome to JSR 311

From: Dhanji R. Prasanna <>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 21:30:43 +1000

On 4/11/07, Jerome Louvel <> wrote:
> Dhanji,
> I am all for a usable API. Usable in the sense that target applications
> would *only* need to rely on this JSR API to be developed. Then these
> applications should be easily deployable into containers such as JAX-WS,
> Servlet or Restlet.

This is a good stated goal. We should use this (or something similar) to vet
anything we come up with regard to bloat or abstraction creep (that I think
some of us fear the spi will lead to).
In any case, I think the spi is a conversation we should be having MUCH
later. The application contract (the framework) and common use scenarios
need to be worked out clearly first.

> Sorry I missed your reply before sending the other email about the recent
> JSR title change. is good too, javax.rws (RESTful Web
> Services)
> could be another option more inline with javax.jws.

 Yep, actually I'd lean away from as is a
well-established low-level api (SocketFactory, HttpsURLConnection etc.).
javax.rws or any variant sounds good.

Paul/Marc: Out of curiosity, what exactly was ASF's objection? The comment
seemed to indicate they didnt want jsr311 to be perceived as THE rest
Does this mean they expect other standards/frameworks around rest web
services? Or that they feel rest is broader than just web services (in which
case could we do something like:

Anyway, dont want to sidetrack the discussion with such trivia as this. We
can work thru this later.