<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> E.g., if I have a resource that accepts GET, POST, PUT and DELETE, > the form is probably only going to tickle one of those methods... > You could put together a set of forms that covered all of the > ground, of course, but for some tasks, that's pretty clunky. You're right, a given form will only cover one of the verbs. Of course, but going this route we're talking about low-rest (or two- verb rest), so PUT and DELETE are already out of consideration. As for the other verbs, it would certainly be neccessary to have a collection of forms to completely document an interface. Is it clunky? yeah, probably. Just throwing out ideas here, though. </blockquote><div> I certainly agree, that this will not cover "high-rest". But, I also already said, that I consider "low-rest" to be service-oriented and "high-rest" resource oriented. Consequently, a service model may look like: - PUT -> deploy a service - GET -> describe the service (using the mechanisms brainstormed about here) - POST -> execute - DELETE -> undeploy If you want to include "high-rest" you probably need something completely different. I am just trying to find the equivalent of the standard soa model proclaimed by ws-* people and also, if this is viable or not. Also note, that this approach takes care of the directory aspect (no uddi required, just a sitemap and/or search engine).  </div> </div>