[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Fielding's paper and the URI definition make pretty
good boundaries. The concepts that "on the web" means:
1. Unification of address and name space through
application of the URI definitions to enable the
identification of resources
2. Application of consistent interface semantics
as exemplified by HTTP to ensure access to resources
seems clear enough. Now:
Does item 1 imply that all URIs should use http:
in the URI string for namespaces?
Does item 2 imply that only HTTP-defined semantics
as defined in the Fielding REST architecture
must be implemented in any other protocol that
claims to enable web-access?
RDF and the SemWeb concepts are interesting in themselves.
They aren't currently required in items 1 and 2 above.
However, they are defined in terms of these, yes? So
aren't they web-application only? IOW, one only gets
these if one is working within the web architecture
per items one and two?
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@xegesis.org]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 9:30 AM
To: xml-dev
Subject: Re: RE: [xml-dev] Will Web Services Kill HTTP?
4/15/2002 9:56:33 AM, "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com> wrote:
>So it seems to me that clarity in the defining and
>bounding architectures is vital.
Very true. "The Web Architecture" is not defined by the W3C except in some non-
normative musings by Tim Berners-Lee, and Roy Fielding's exposition of the more
abstract REST principles. Nor is the "SOAP" architecture (if there is one), or the
"Web RPC" architecture defined anywhere that I know of.
|
