[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
To: "'Mike Champion'" <mc@xegesis.org>; "xml-dev" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 9:45 AM
Subject: RE: RE: [xml-dev] Will Web Services Kill HTTP?
> 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
That would be an interesting read. Although does that
mean the full extend of URI scope. Which includes
ftp, mailto, nntp, and I am sure I am missing a few others
that are resolvable through URI.
and does number 2 apply to those URIs?? So does that
expand the scope of the web to include protocols outside
of HTTP/S ??
> 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
>
May I ask in the REST principles a contributing factor to the
very real issue of a SOAP call over HTTP. Since HTTP doesn't
maintain a connection if communications appears to drop out.
A RPC that takes more time than the communication timer
is allowed for and the connection is dropped. I suppose there are ways
around it. (write the client to periodically check for new info)
I appears to me that a RPC standard that relys on the disconnected standard
of HTTP would have some limitations. (a certain limit in processing time of
a procedure for instance) Excuse me if these seem a little daft, but just my
observations.
Douglas
>
> -----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.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
|
