[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [rest-practices] Relative uris


you might want adding xml:base attributes then. For example if it were an atom feed containing the relative link URIs then a generic reader may be able to recognize xml:base and properly construct an absolute URI. Json data may indeed contain a base attribute (as opposed to element) too....

You might also want to check how relative URIs with/without xml:base are supported by browsers, ex, in cases where an HTML-based representation is returned. I think I might've heard people saying it depends on the concrete browser implementations.

cheers, Sergey

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark McLoughlin" <markmc redhat com>
To: "Bryan Kearney" <bkearney redhat com>
Cc: "rest-practices" <rest-practices redhat com>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:21:30 PM GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal
Subject: Re: [rest-practices] Relative uris

On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 07:47 -0400, Bryan Kearney wrote:
> What happens if you do JSON over a message bus? Are you using the same 
> serialization? That may be an edge case, but I would not want ot have to 
> manage multiple serialiing layers per transprot. 

You're marshalling objects over QMF which contain URIs into the REST

You'd probably be better with absolute URIs for that, but you could
include the entry point URI somehow so that relative URIs could be


rest-practices mailing list
rest-practices redhat com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]