W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2002

RE: FW: draft findings on Unsafe Methods (whenToUseGet-7)

From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 12:18:26 +0100
To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>, "'Don Box'" <dbox@microsoft.com>, <dorchard@bea.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
Cc: "'Hutchison, Nigel'" <Nigel.Hutchison@softwareag.com>, <jones@research.att.com>, <moore@cs.utk.edu>
Message-ID: <001b01c1e793$ee557030$887ba8c0@mitchum>
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] 
> On Behalf Of Mark Baker
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 06:28:44PM -0700, Don Box wrote:
> > It is happening again in this decade, since like it or not,  
> SOAP seems 
> > to be where networked applications are headed.
> 
> SOAP has been actively promoted since Sept 1999, about 32 
> months ago. Between June 1993, and about the same time later, 
> Jan 1996, the Web grew from 130 to about 100,000 sites[1].  
> Though I can't be bothered to count them, XMethods.net[2] 
> lists perhaps a couple of hundred Web services.
> 
> I wonder when Web services proponents will ask themselves why 
> they're not seeing the same kind of growth that the Web saw?  
> It couldn't be because of a lack of marketing $$$! 8-)
> 
> IMO (and to keep this on topic 8-), it's because if you have 
> an HTTP URI, you know what methods you can invoke on it (GET 
> being the method supported by all HTTP URI, 
> http://api.google.com/search/beta2
> notwithstanding).  

You're leaving out some things that helped adoption of the web at
that time: a tcp/ip stack in Windows, Netscape and dumb VC money.
That's not to say the web wouldn't have taken off at some point
(you'd figure someone would come up with a decent browser and an
IMG tag eventually). 

I think what you're talking about has something to with scaling,
but the only people I know that adopt things because they are
scalable (as opposed to being cool) are software architects,
standards wonks, and corporate IT procurers. You're right to mark
Google's api as notwithstanding. That's actually cool and useful,
and I imagine not scaling is the last reason people won't program
to it. Worrying about scaling is a bit like premature optimization
in that sense. 

Bill de hÓra




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4

iQA/AwUBPL/9AOaWiFwg2CH4EQIKPACfVB0AuvK3NkH8+ayC7JoL54BqlVUAn23O
7tthVYaY8inKXK/MFWeDNntH
=LE47
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Friday, 19 April 2002 07:25:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:06 GMT