I think that would be ideal.

The key to API adoption will come not only from ease-of-use but from 
availability of language bindings. Manually creating and maintaining the Python 
binding is well and good, but having to create and maintain bindings for Java, 
C#, C++, C, Ruby, PHP, etc is going to be a full time job for many parties. Not 
to mention versioning support.

The beauty of having a machine consumable format is to automate the changes in 
the bindings as soon as the WADL (or whatever) changes. All clients move 
lock-step with the server changes. As I mentioned before, it's even better when 
the server WADL is auto-generated from the implementation.

Yes, there are technical issues around this. The greatest being the "sugar" on 
the user interface. For example, knowing that something is a password or 
calendar field. Or using the output from one call as input to another. But for 
basic <function> <parameters> -> <response> type calls, I know this is do-able. 
At the very least we should be able to create a nice object model for clients 
to use. 

Is WADL rich enough to support this? That's what we need to investigate.

-S

________________________________________
From: Mark Nottingham [m...@mnot.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 10:16 AM
To: Sandy Walsh
Cc: Mellquist, Peter; Joseph Heck; openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] +1,  All services should have WADLs

On 26/10/2011, at 11:17 PM, Sandy Walsh wrote:

> As discussed at the summit, I agree there should be some form of IDL (WADL 
> being the likely candidate for REST), I think manually crafting/maintaining a 
> WADL (or XML in general) is a fools errand. This stuff is made for machine 
> consumption and should be machine generated. Whatever solution we adopt, we 
> should keep that requirement in mind.

I've stayed out of the discussions about WADL mostly, because up till now 
they've been centred on creating documentation and running tests. As far as 
that goes, these are reasonable things to do with it.

What do you mean by "machine consumption" -- are you saying that you want 
clients to automatically generate bindings?

Cheers,


--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/




_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to     : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to