W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2001

Re: TAG issues brainstorming

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@ebuilt.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:16:21 -0800
To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <20011217211621.D8255@waka.ebuilt.net>
On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 08:12:53PM -0800, David Orchard wrote:
> Issues:
> 
> 1. System architecture document.  We should describe the way the web
> currently works, leveraging Tim's dependency diagram.  This should also help
> with MB's issue that he doesn't believe HTTP is well enough understood.
> Rational has a leading methodology for software architecture, described in
> http://www.rational.com/products/whitepapers/350.jsp.  If we chose this
> methodology, I don't think we need to go into all the views.  A logical
> view - showing dependencies (uses relationships) - plus a physical view
> would be a good start.  I'm very open to other methodologies as well, I
> simply list this one as an industry standard.  This document would also list
> open issues, such as my issues #2-#5.  I suggest that we adopt a methodology
> from industry rather than creating our own.

That methodology is based on object-oriented design, which is not an
appropriate paradigm for the Web.  It would be like using railroad definitions
to describe an airport (or vice versa).  They mention the notion of using
E-R diagrams as a substitution for the logical view, but I've never seen
someone use 4+1 outside of OOD.  A data-flow methodology like JSD would
fit better, but few people know how to use (or read) JSD.

I did not restrict the descriptions in my dissertation [1] to any particular
methodology, but they were more for the sake of examples than a rigorous
topology of all aspects of the Web.

  [1] http://www.ebuilt.com/fielding/pubs/dissertation/top.htm

That description of the Web architecture is my interpretation of Tim's
original design goals, plus the the ones we added in 1994-95.  If we are
going to make a more formal definition, then we are going to have to
decide what the Web is first and come to some sort of agreement on the
terminology surrounding URI, resources, representations, metadata, etc.

Of course, I prefer my definitions. ;-)

Cheers,

Roy T. Fielding, Chief Scientist, eBuilt
                 (fielding@ebuilt.com)  <http://www.ebuilt.com/fielding/>

                 Chairman, The Apache Software Foundation
                 (fielding@apache.org)  <http://www.apache.org/>
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2001 00:19:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:03 GMT