Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Tuesday 12 February 2002 04:55 am, Paul Prescod wrote:
> Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote:
> > Have you considered doing so? Seems to me that BEEP would do
> > rather well as part of an implementation of the REST
> > architecture... certainly no worse than HTTP.
> Roy claims he spent five years, working full-time at the W3C, tuning
> REST and HTTP: "The first edition of REST was developed between
> October 1994 and August 1995, primarily as a means for communicating
> Web concepts as we wrote the HTTP/1.0 specification and the initial
> HTTP/1.1 proposal.
Right, but he
a) wasn't by any means alone.
b) wasn't the person with the final say
c) wasn't working from REST with an blank slate.
> I see nothing in BEEP that indicates that has built upon those years
> of work. It doesn't even claim to be a protocol at the same level of
> the protocol stack as HTTP.
That's right. A different implementation strategy.... maybe a bit more
work, but a bit cleaner perhaps. Tying REST to HTTP does it a