[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> HTTP like RDF has to thrive on its own merits and they
> are, as Fielding says, consistent interfaces.
> Even URIs are just data. If that defines the
> system boundaries of the Web, good. That is a
> coherent boundary. BEEP enabled systems can
> share data with it, share languages with it,
> and so on, but it is a different system. I don't
> know anything about BEEP? Does it use the
> spec'd URI identification system?
BEEP tends to sit below the level of HTTP, in some regards, as it doesn't
define URIs or anything.
It's up to you (and your application) to define a URI format for your
particular protocol. I don't do SOAP, but I believe folks have come up
with something like:
soap+beep://machine.domain/....
That's part of 'the binding' of SOAP to BEEP. BEEP tends mostly to be
just a transport mechanism for octets, that conveniently allows you to
channelize your connection.
> Is BEEP-bound SOAP considered to be "on
> the Web" or "on the Internet" as "BEEP-enabled
> services"?
I'd certainly consider it to be 'on the internet'. Not 'on the web'
though, since it doesn't use 'web' protocols.
-bob
|
