[uf-rest] Interface(s) first, implementation second?

[Tantek Ç elik]

All I have to say is, David, great to have you here.  I couldn't have said
what you said any better.

Thanks,

Tantek

On 11/15/05 12:38 PM, "David Heinemeier Hansson" <david at loudthinking.com>
wrote:

>>  Shouldn't we first __agree on URI structure and XML formats__ to
>> transmit
>>  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
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-rest