[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Web Services API: URL naming proposal
- Subject: Re: Web Services API: URL naming proposal
- From: Chris Travers <..hidden..>
- Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:59:14 -0800
I may reply to John's very detailed post later, particularly focusing
on areas where the application is limited by HTTP at the moment (and
hence some skepticism as to whether the whole application should be
exportable as web services) but for now I have three questions:
1) What is the scope we want to give to the web service interface?
2) How many of these areas would the database-level API structure we
are working on be a better or worse fit?
3) As far as state handling, do we really need "stateful web
services" or should we look at a re-usable API which could be
encasulated over other protocols (for example XMPP) where we need a
richer interface/things like state handling?
I will say clearly that in an ideal world, everything in LedgerSMB
would be running over a fully stateful protocol, but that's not a
model we have inherited and so we do a lot of work in some areas
getting around the fact that we are using the adjustable wrench that
HTTP is to pound nails.