Hi Christoph,

On 25 August 2010 16:50, Christoph Helma <helma at in-silico.ch> wrote:

> My first impression is, that WADL gets little attention in the Ruby
> community. With a quick search I have found no library that makes an
> reliable impression.

Did you check this one:

http://github.com/blackwinter/wadl

> WADL seems to be also controversial in the
> REST community (http://bitworking.org/news/193/Do-we-need-WADL).

Well, that is true, but one could also make the argument that REST
itself is controversial, so this cannot be the sole criterion...

> My
> impression is that WADL is deeply rooted in Java culture, other cultures
> would approach things differently ;-).

The greatest danger for WADL that I see is that it was supported by
Sun and could become orphan nowadays (but again, the same holds true
for a lot of other products, including Java itself).

> If it is about documentation, why don't we document in OWL-DL (e.g. in
> analogy to algorithm respresentation)? This seems to be more consistent
> with the rest of our framework.

That also looks like a sensible approach to me. We could even implement both :-)

Kind regards,
Vedrin