Sean Landis wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Marc Hadley wrote:
>>> On May 30, 2008, at 1:37 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>>>> As far as JAX-WS goes, I don't think it should even be mentioned in the
>>>> specification. The Endpoint interface brings in a lot of baggage that we
>>>> don't want/need in REST, or concepts (like Handlers) that we may want a
>>>> JAX-RS style/flavor for.
>>>>
>>> Having looked more closely at JAX-WS endpoint I have to agree that we
>>> should steer clear, there's too much that's inappropriate.
>>>
>>> So, the question is: do we invent our own interface similar to JAX-WS
>>> Endpoint but without the stuff we don't need or do we stick with the current
>>> API and defer the question of a standard endpoint interface to a subsequent
>>> revision of the spec.
>>>
>> I'll answer with a question: What are the general deployments going to be?
>> Does the createEndpoint or a JAX-RS Endpoint model fit within the Spring
>> model? EJB/EE model? Its the same reason I don't like the
>> ApplicationConfig class. I'm not sure it fits in either Spring or EE.
>
> These are very important deployments but let's not forget Java SE or
> simple servlets w/o any significant container features. We use Restlet
> this way for our dozen or so web services.
>
RESTEasy is implemented as a servlet and both createeEndpoint and
ApplicationConfig are a bit awkward.
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com