[Web-SIG] Request and Response objects

Michael C. Neel neel at mediapulse.com
Wed Oct 29 10:21:00 EST 2003

> There was a discussion about whether there should be a single 
> object for 
> both request and response.

At first I thought that having a separate request and response object
didn't offer any advantages.  This is most likely because I've work with
Apache for so long, which only has one object to handle both.

Upon more thought though, I'm starting to think having them as separate
objects might be better.  Separate, a project could focus only on the
side of the process they are interested in.  An example would be an XLST
engine.  So in theory take in any request object, from cgi, mod_python,
python's stdlib server and prepare my XML response based on the request,
then pass this XML data to the XLST response object to do the skinning.
Since the developers of this XLST response object have no reason to care
about the request side, it seems better that they don't need to even be
aware of it.

On a related note, for all those out there like mod_python that have in
place a request or request and response objects now, I think the best
solution would be for them to include a conversion function in their
objects to convert their foramts to whatever the SIG comes up with as
the standards.  I *do not* want mod_python to match the SIG's standard,
I want it to match the Apache API; but being able to convert between the
two at the cost of a few cpu cycles would be great.

On a less related note, I don't know if XLST parser made the list yet,
but if it could be added it's something I would really like to see.


More information about the Web-SIG mailing list