Quoting [Chris Webb] (Apr 16 2009):
eprparadocs@gmail.com writes:
Perhaps I didn't quite understand your approach. I would think we should enumerate the parts of each API and the interpretation and leave to another section the actual bits over the wire. That way we could support anything, including binary XML!
Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net> writes:
Actually you're spot on - I'm just pointing out what's common and conceding that we should be flexible about the 1's and 0's.
Great, I agree with both of you!
Our supporting a variety of API formats has given a significant win for those end-users not using heavyweight XML-friendly languages, e.g. writing shell scripts in the way one might when working with traditional infrastructure and the contents of one's virtual machines. I don't want to lose that user-convenience.
+1 -- Nothing is ever easy.