Lists Home |
Date Index |
And some information should not be exposed in URLs.
I have to wonder what the chilling effect on nascent
web projects is of the churn since the REST vs SOAP
debate has emerged as the dominant topic of list
conversation. When a CTO labels the W3C as an
"academic organization" and says that if business
interests aren't served, business goes elsewhere,
there is simultaneously a shot across the bow
and a prophecy that has a likelihood of being
self-fulfilling. We don't have to debate the
morality of that to understand the implications.
SOAP based business services are going forward.
There is no stopping that. Where two
forces meet in conflict and neither can yield, there is
usually a lot of energy wasted. After a time,
there is so much waste, the leaders of both
sides lose their respective mandates. At this point, aside
from the critical technical analyses, some may
want to consider if it will be better overall
to put up a breakwater before the beaches
erode into unusable rock ledges. It
is not a surrender for both sides to coexist
as long as each can determine its own destiny
independent of the other's will. However, that
has implications for shared definitions. Whatever
is decided about SOAP or REST cannot be part of
the XML core specification because both use it.
If this is true of other definitions, the same
From: John Cowan [mailto:email@example.com]
I think that overstates the case. URLs can in practice only be so
long, and a side-effect-free operation might require a large number of
parameters. So POSTs can be side-effect-free, but GETs should never
have side effects.