wcsplus mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Yes. Resource-centric makes sense for discrete, pre-existing resources (underthe prevailing governance arrangements, whatever they are ...). Then resources can be denoted "by id".
However, interfaces to "datasets" usually involve extraction and other modes of "creation". Knowing the dataset ID is only the starting point. The request also includes parameters, and these might not be ID's of "sub-resources". So it may simply be that extraction-from-dataset-oriented services can never be truly RESTful? Simon
-----Original Message----- From: wcsplus-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wcsplus-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jon Blower Sent: Friday, 2 November 2007 5:07 PM To: Ethan Davis Cc: wcsplus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [wcsplus] Design of asynchronous request in DEWS WCS Hi Ethan, I agree with all your comments, thanks. Regarding REST, I think the main problem is with the XML POST method of reading data. In REST, a POST means a "create", not a "read". A RESTful service would only use GET for reading data, but OWS requests can sometimes be long and complex and hard to fit into a URL using KVP. REST takes a resource-centric approach, but to my mind OGC services are query-centric. I think it's going to be hard to make a truly RESTful OGC service but I haven't done much thinking about it. My main worry is that I've met a lot of people who seem to think that "REST" simply means "not SOAP" and so they think that OGC services are already RESTful, or that it would be easy to change to a RESTful design. Therefore I was keen to ensure we were all on the same page on this list! ;-) Cheers, Jon
_______________________________________________ wcsplus mailing list wcsplus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For list information or to unsubscribe, visit: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/=20