tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7395172357368553438.post1579795172252331732..comments2022-04-12T01:40:46.270+02:00Comments on SOA Bits and Ramblings: RESTful resources are not typedElfiskhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01091018516358987653noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7395172357368553438.post-28070936438566293802012-04-18T20:40:26.671+02:002012-04-18T20:40:26.671+02:00Seems like HTTP includes parameters in content neg...Seems like HTTP includes parameters in content negotiation, see http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.1, so "Accept: application/xhtml+xml; profile=xyz" should be doable.Elfiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01091018516358987653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7395172357368553438.post-26999613780945489902012-04-18T20:24:09.146+02:002012-04-18T20:24:09.146+02:00But you could in fact do it in application/xhtml+x...But you could in fact do it in application/xhtml+xml which has a "profile" parameter. HTML may not be the most intuitive format for API data, but it is doable as some sort of micro format.<br /><br />It does still require frameworks to support content negotiation with parameters. Don't know if that is normal or not.Elfiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01091018516358987653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7395172357368553438.post-14211070018567352392012-04-18T20:19:06.839+02:002012-04-18T20:19:06.839+02:00First of all I haven't been able to find a &qu...First of all I haven't been able to find a "type" parameter for application/xml in RFC 3023, so its not legal unless that RFC is superseded by another one.<br /><br />But lets assume it is allowed ... then it *must* be supported by server frameworks as part of the content negotiation. Conneg is the core of being able to abstract away the thinking of resources as having a specific type. Try take a look at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.txt appendix A.6 and forth - it has some good reasons for not using a type parameter or similar.<br /><br />Besides that you could also use a Link header with the "profile" relationship. Mark Nottingham has a piece on this at http://www.mnot.net/blog/2012/04/17/profiles - but be sure to read James Snell's comment on http://chmod777self.blogspot.com/2012/04/on-profile-link-relation.html.Elfiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01091018516358987653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7395172357368553438.post-77857601363308672062012-04-18T14:33:19.148+02:002012-04-18T14:33:19.148+02:00Why must private media types stay inside the enter...Why must private media types stay inside the enterprise? Private media types also can be specializations of public media types. The public media types (eg application/xml) provide the default behavior through generic clients. The specializations (application/xml;type=destination), understood by the enterprise clients, provide specific behavior for the enterprise. The web can scale to accommodate enterprise applications!Peter Rushforthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09472639836847800891noreply@blogger.com