Colin Jack's Blog - All Comments

re: WCF and REST

JOY — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 07:22:29 GMT

Great! The articles so far have been full of great material. Glad to hear the serious will continue. Keep 'em coming!

re: P&P - Web Service with REST Application Pattern

bdebcayxego — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:58:23 GMT

I1HUE4 <a href="kpbcvzhrxwjw.com/.../a>, [url=http://oheekxxnveis.com/]oheekxxnveis[/url], [link=http://ijsffryenusj.com/]ijsffryenusj[/link], http://rksdhshjkqnb.com/

re: SOA Manifesto

Steve — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:54:43 GMT

Not sure why nobody has commented on this yet, but I too was disappointed in the Manifesto.

Seems like a group of people desperately trying to become the next Martin Fowler or something. Saying this "document" is useless is probably an overstatement, but it sure as heck isn't very useful.

RESTful Web Services Cookbook - Review of Rough Cut

DotNetBurner - Web Services — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:50:32 GMT

DotNetBurner - burning hot .net content

re: WCF and REST

colinjack — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 10:36:41 GMT

@Vish

Ok sorry, those improvements are great. I'd argue that first 2 are key. 3/5/7 matter less than the others. I can do 4 currently but better linking/content negotiation and a *much* better story around extensibility are key, we've got framework for that but it was ridiculously difficult. On extensibility instead of examples, or in addition to, why not look at mob's contrib?

@Jesse

Ahh ok, we're not using WCF client-side at all. The support there is beyond dire. Not sure I want to drop back to the Message class, I know its an option but not an overly attractive one.

@mob

Yeah MS doesn't seem to be setup to listen, people on the teams seem interested but they've got pressures on all sides. Great on the Contrib, will need to give it a look over and agree that it looks like OSS is going to end up beating WCF hands-down unless there are serious improvements.

Scott Banwart’s Blog » Blog Archive » Distributed Weekly 15

Scott Banwart’s Blog » Blog Archive » Distributed Weekly 15 — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:42:23 GMT

Pingback from Scott Banwart’s Blog » Blog Archive » Distributed Weekly 15

re: WCF and REST

Jesse Ezell — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:36:16 GMT

REST is much easier with WCF when you throw out all the contract bullshit and use IRequestChannel / Message class and the http message properties directly. That makes it a shit framework for end users, but if you are building a REST framework, that is a much better place to start.

That said... I would be much more interested in someone developing a generic / non-HTTP REST framework on top of WCF that yet another MVC framework for http...

re: WCF and REST

Vish — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 18:45:38 GMT

Hi Colin

One correction to your blog post - .NET 4.0 will have a lot of WCF improvements that correspond to asks we have got from you and others. Specifically 4.0 will have:

1. Content negotiation and richer format support for binary/text/views

2. Some linking support

3. Http exceptions

4. Conditional get/put support

5. Ability to use System.Web.Routing so that you dont need .svc files or .svc in the URL

6. Samples illustrating how to use WCF extensibility, and making it easier to do so (for example, adding Forms processing to WCF)

7. Support for JSONP

And some other features.

4.0 Beta2, which will come out sometime this year, should have all these features.

Your feedback will be welcome.

re: WCF and REST

mob — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 04:02:05 GMT

I feel your pain, we went through the same thing. I ended up writing an OSS library to fix some of the pain points in WCF REST that we were experiencing (wcfrestcontrib.codeplex.com). And yes, the RSK is "appalling". It does not encourage good RESTful design, especially the templates. Thats bad news for REST newcomers since they may follow what comes out of Redmond if they don't know any better. And the starter kit (And the API) should be encouraging proper RESTful design.

At least you were able to talk to the guys on the WCF REST team. I continually got put off by the two leads and finally gave up. It's almost like they didn't want to listen. And their responses on the Connect site to some of my issues were not very encouraging either. It really seemed like they didn't get it. The only one who I was briefly in contact with who seemed to get it was the WCF PM, he was a really sharp guy.

A friend of mine just switched from WCF REST to OpenRasta and he really likes it. I think I'll be trying it out for my next REST project. Like you said, the good REST stacks will probably end up being OSS frameworks.

Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #376

Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #376 — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 07:30:36 GMT

Pingback from Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #376

re: Next Europe VAN - 1st June 2009 - Questions for Udi Dahan

Martin — Tue, 19 May 2009 05:57:55 GMT

Please please make it a high resolution video if you choose to record it!

Thanks!

Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #349

Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #349 — Mon, 18 May 2009 06:57:01 GMT

Pingback from Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #349

re: Book Review - RESTful .NET

colinjack — Sun, 17 May 2009 23:20:04 GMT

@Chuck

Something like OpenRasta has first class support and I'd definitely recommend anyone have a look at it:

trac.caffeine-it.com/openrasta

re: Book Review - RESTful .NET

Chuck — Fri, 15 May 2009 19:14:36 GMT

Not a fan of REST in WCF.

"WCF's support for links in normal representations was non-existent"

"tried to add framework to make linking a lot easier (something Seb did for us)"

Have you seen other frameworks that have better support for this?

re: Book Review - RESTful .NET

joey — Tue, 12 May 2009 01:33:05 GMT

should add this review to amazon so other customers are aware.