[uf-rest] Interface(s) first, implementation second?
Tantek Ç elik
tantek at cs.stanford.edu
Tue Nov 15 12:45:03 PST 2005
All I have to say is, David, great to have you here. I couldn't have said
what you said any better.
On 11/15/05 12:38 PM, "David Heinemeier Hansson" <david at loudthinking.com>
>> Shouldn't we first __agree on URI structure and XML formats__ to
>> and then discuss how it is implemented in Ruby, Python, Java, ...
> I don't believe in trying to pick the abstraction before the
> implementation. We need to get a feel for what works by actually
> doing it. Just by looking at the URL scheme that Donald proposed, I
> would probably have nodded my head and thought: Great! Actually
> trying to implement it made me realize some of the issues.
>> Sidenote: We have still XSLT on our tool stack to do some work, so we
>> could e.g. return plain xml but with an XSLT attached to render as
>> XHTML which in turn is formatted via CSS.
> I definitely don't want to step on any one's toes, but my personal
> preference is that XSLT is the spawn of evil :). My brain is simply
> incompatible with XSLT and I can't imagine working on any stack that
> includes that. But that's of course just me. We might well have
> different flavors of doing things where one of them includes XSLT.
> David Heinemeier Hansson
> http://www.37signals.com -- Basecamp, Backpack, Writeboard, Tada
> http://www.loudthinking.com -- Broadcasting Brain
> http://www.rubyonrails.com -- Web-application framework
> microformats-rest mailing list
> microformats-rest at microformats.org
More information about the microformats-rest