W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-socialweb@w3.org > February 2010

Re: High-level social web guiding principles to SWxG

From: Tim Anglade <timanglade@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 16:38:24 +0100
Message-ID: <60d0f3ab1002010738s4d25e281x223614d3d91de81f@mail.gmail.com>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Cc: Döhler, Anita, VF-Group <Anita.Doehler@vodafone.com>, public-xg-socialweb@w3.org
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Melvin Carvalho
<melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:17 PM, "Döhler, Anita, VF-Group"
> <Anita.Doehler@vodafone.com> wrote:
>>
>> High level principles
>>
>> 1.      What you see depends on who you are.
>
> DKA mentioned today some potential further discussion on point (1).  So
> perhaps this may be better in a dedicated thread but the immediate questions
> I have are:
>
> 1. Will having a different veiw, depending on who you are, be necessarily be
> RESTful?

That does not impair potential RESTful-ness. Client-side cookies
achieve this already and are accepted withing the REST philosophy [1]
as they do not prevent the system from being “stateless” [2].

> 2. Is being RESTful a pre-requisite, in general?

I don't think being RESTful is a pre-requisite at the W3C (can
somebody confirm this?). It's certainly not a pre-requisite for the
industry at-large.


Cheers,
Tim


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_State_Transfer#Constraints
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateless_server
Received on Monday, 1 February 2010 15:39:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 1 February 2010 15:39:00 GMT