Hi Marc,
> > IMO, this JAX prefix will lead to confusion and assumption
> > from new users that REST usage necessarily implies XML,
> > which we all agree isn't true.
> >
> FWIW, I agree with you and argued the same.
Maybe if there is a consensus in this EG, we can request another change to
this title before the Early Draft review.
> > JAR-WS is a closer match for "Java API for RESTful Web Services"
> > but is a
> > bit ambiguous with the JAR (Java ARchive) acronym...
> >
> > Is it too late to commit to something like javax.net.rws?
> >
> I don't think its too late to change though looking at the current
> javax.net I don't think that is a good home either. I quite like the
> javax.ws prefix, I'm less happy with the .rs suffix but can
> live with
> it since we can't use .rest.
The description for javax.net is "Provides classes for networking
applications" which doesn't seem incompatible with our scope. I think that
javax.ws implies a bit too much that it defines the Web Services API.
javax.rws would work better for me as it is a direct acronym for "RESTful
Web Services" and has some consistency with the existing "javax.jws"
package.
Best regards,
Jerome