[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
And keeping it loosely coupled means not needing
to know much more than that to start the conversation.
That's email. It is discovery-based.
But a conversation is not a protocol. A protocol
(by any of the definitions I've seen), sets
expectations precisely. It seems to me that the
UDDI methods are there precisely because the
gestures/speech acts are "relevance feedback
control" and the designers specifically want
the 'advantages' of that architecture over
'downloadable feature engines' or a 'single proxy'.
BTW: if the WSIO gets traction, and uses UDDI
as announced, what do you think based on your
work with REST, the results will be?
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul@prescod.net]
Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote:
>
> I think it's questionable whether the unification has more to do with
> GET than with URI's themselves. FWIW.
Be careful. URIs aren't innovative either. They are just email
addresses.
"REST therefore gains the separation of concerns of the client-server
style without the server scalability problem, allows information hiding
through a generic interface to enable encapsulation and
evolution of services, and provides for a diverse set of functionality
through downloadable feature-engines."
"This constraint sacrifices some of the advantages of other
architectures, such as the stateful interaction of a relevance
feedback protocol like WAIS, in order to retain the
advantages of a single, generic interface for connector semantics. In
return, the generic interface makes it possible to access a multitude
of services through a single proxy."
|
