Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Simon St.Laurent said: > Jim Ancona wrote: >> Simon St.Laurent wrote: >>> >>> Maybe it's just my priorities, but a URI format that lets you identify >>> parts of resources seems like a safer path to take than adding a new >>> HTTP method and then having to come up with various formats for doing >>> the patching. (Not to mention upgrades to web servers.) >> >> I agree that there seem to be two possible approaches: >> - Define a new verb (PATCH) and a suitable diff format or formats. >> - Use the verbs we have and identify parts of resources with their own >> URIs (making them first-class resources). >> >> Note that I phrased that second one differently than you did, because >> once you come up with a way to assign a URI to a sub-resource, it become >> a full-fledged resources. > > Yep - that's fine with me, so long as I can get to the partials. By coincidence, I had been working on a paper looking at this kind of issue for a client, which might be interesting because the fragment issue arises in a concrete instance, large sets of legislation. See my blog on PRESTO: http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2008/02/presto_a_www_information_archi.html Cheers Rick Jelliffe
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
