jhjkrhsd
03-23-2011, 05:50 AM
Do you construct amazing web pages? Are you a net developer who crafts wonderful HTML5CSSJS? If so, you'll want to attempt HiFi. It can be a brand new website publishing platform that provides you 100% handle about your HTML mark-up. I aided create it. Test it out and inform me what you believe. "WebKit's Accept header results in web developers choosing between HTTP incorrectness or a bad user experience. Follow the HTTP spec and your users will get XML dumps as demo'd, or do not follow the HTTP spec and roll your own one-off content-negotiation protocol."It is hard to talk about this issue in 140 characters, so here are my thoughts...The naive use of Accept is non-RESTful because it renders external provenance data useless or wrong. For example,Office 2007 Licence (http://www.office2007-key.ca/), suppose there is a resource, that has a XML representation and a HTML representation. Furthermore, assume the XML representation was authored by Jon and the HTML representation was authored by Jake. Now, suppose I tweet something like the following:"check out out Jon's work @ If you dereference the above URI in Firefox you'll actually be looking at Jake's work. This means I need to send a second piece of state information (almost like a cookie) along with my tweet,Office 2007 Enterprise (http://www.office2007key.us/), like so:"examine out Jon's work @ but first set your browser to applicationxml"Clearly, this is a step backward compared with something like:"investigate out Jon's work @ In fact, the trouble with WebKit's Accept header is not that it is wrong, just that it is unexpected. That is,windows 7 x86 (http://www.windows7-key.eu/), WebKit's behavior is dependent upon a piece of shared state embedded across all WebKit clients and,Office 2010 Pro Plus (http://www.office-2010-key.de/), furthermore,Office Pro 2007 Key (http://www.office2007-key.ca/), that shared state is different than the shared state embedded across all Firefox clients. None of this sounds RESTful to me.