xml-dev - Re: need for defining standard APIs for xml storage

[Ken MacLeod <ken@bitsko.slc.ut.us>]

"KenNorth" <KenNorth@email.msn.com> writes:

> > [Don't take me wrong, either, I'm not suggesting HTTP as an
> > end-all API (or protocol) to any particular solution.  But to not
> > include it on a list of APIs for XML storage, as your original
> > message suggested,] simply because it doesn't fit one's
> > preconceived notions as to "what is an API" seems to be a grievous
> > error.
> 
> Probably not my first, but I'll accept the risk of making a grievous
> error.  The industry suffers from imprecise language. To me there is
> a distinction between protocol and API, and there is no value in
> blurring the distinction.

OK, for the sake of precision and for the moment, let me disregard
HTTP method definitions and agree with you that HTTP is only a
protocol.

Where does that leave HTTP as still being one of the most common ways
to provide XML storage?

It still seems that you're pigeonholing HTTP only as something to
carry a messaging or RPC protocol on top of (so _that_ protocol can
support an "API").  why?

  -- Ken

***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************