[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 12:13:47PM -0500, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> I have a hard time believing that we need fewer protocols for similar
> reasons. HTTP is great for what it does, but I'm not very happy with
> partisans who insist that we should build everything on HTTP for greater
> interop, whether RESTish or SOAPish. That notion has some real
> problems, as described in [2],
RFC 3205 describes the dangers of *misusing* HTTP, not the problems of
using it as was intended (or in approximation to that). When I
recommend that somebody use HTTP, I do it suggesting they use HTTP as
was intended, since in most (not all) cases, that's sufficient. Plus
it's always the most valuable thing to do, as it integrates that
system into the Web.
> BEEP seems like the right middle ground to me. It lets developers use a
> shared framework for exchanging secure messages, but leaves the nature
> of the messages open. That feels like a good fit with XML generally.
Sure, but it punts on the most important part of application protocol
design; the application semantics. HTTP gives you those, and it lets
you use XML.
MB
--
Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
|
