Lists Home |
Date Index |
Michael Champion wrote:
>On Apr 5, 2005 9:16 AM, Bill de hÓra <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>If you decide to go the POST route, what you want to avoid are exposing
>>controller URIs (all client requests go to one URI). At least give the
>>things of interest (the equivalent of your objects in your domain model
>>or your table rows in your physical data model) visible identity.
>Why " give things of interest (the equivalent of your objects in your
>domain model or your table rows in your physical data model) visible
I understand this to mean: create objects (=resources, when speaking
about REST) for the things of interest and expose them to the client
(to make caching of read-data-requests (GET in REST-land) possible.
>That seems to violate the principle of information
Hmm...making the objects of interest known to the client is not what I
understand by "information hiding". "Information hiding" to me means to
hide the implementation from the client.
Of course there are issues with the granularity of what you choose to
expose (Facade pattern comes to mind), but the extreme of providing a
single poiunt of access (e.g. http://foo.org/myService ) to POST
everything to just doesn't seem to cut it when it comes to scalability
But maybe I misunderstand your point.
>that has been around since before OO. It seems to be simply a
>Bad Idea to expose internal details in a world where slimeballs have
>proliferated who would love to subvert your website for fun and/or
>profit. Why not hide them behind a "controller URI" that accepts
>requests and gives them a going over with the polygraph and
>protocoscope, then routes them to whereever the system thinks they
>should be routed at this moment?
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
Consultant & Programmer