W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > December 2001

Why the Web?

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:33:57 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200112141633.LAA18575@markbaker.ca>
To: brian@hursley.ibm.com (Brian E Carpenter)
Cc: moore@cs.utk.edu (Keith Moore), janssen@parc.xerox.com, discuss@apps.ietf.org
> I can't see any basic reason why a thermostat should be accessed as if
> it was a hypertext document.

I would do it for the same reason that anything ends up on the Web;

- I can manipulate it from the same app I use to manipulate so much of
my life already; the browser
- it can leverage existing and yet-to-be-developed extensions such as
WebDAV so that access to it can be locked, versioned, etc..
- if I forget its URL, Google can find it for me
- if my house network is unreliable, an existing cache on the network
can let me know what the last cached state of my thermostat is, and
when that state snapshot was taken
- authentication for free
- content negotiation permits my french-speaking serviceman to
also manipulate and debug it remotely through the same URL

etc..

If that isn't reason enough for you, then do it just to prevent the
APPS area from needing 10 area directors by the end of the decade. 8-)

> I would expect building-services control
> messages to get layered directly over a transport protocol in due 
> course. I certainly want thermostats to be accessed by a highly reliable
> mechanism that survives disconnected operation, which is where this
> thread started.

You didn't think my explanation of reliability in the context of
thermostat control was sufficient?  Can you elaborate on what else
you'd think would be needed?

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Friday, 14 December 2001 11:35:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 March 2006 20:11:29 GMT