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

Re: section 1, intro, for review

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:54:27 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200203182254.RAA07248@markbaker.ca>
To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> This is a point which Mark and I have occasionally discussed  in private. 
> No doubt, HTTP plays a distinguished role in the Web today and for the 
> forseeable future.  Still (and I suspect Mark doesn't agree) I don't see 
> why our architecture should imply that the web would diminished in quality 
> if HTTP were eventually displaced by other protocols.

I know I come off as a bit of an HTTP nut occasionally, but it's
difficult to argue that HTTP is the most wonderful application protocol
ever devised, and at the same time say that it could eventually be
replaced.  But I do believe that.

However, whatever replaces it will look an awful lot like HTTP, because
HTTP embodies so many principles that are key to REST and Web
architecture.  For example, it will have a GET method that will be safe
and idempotent, a PUT method that will be idempotent, a POST method, and
a DELETE method.  It will have a Content-Location "header", or some
other means of asserting the relationship between a resource and a
representation.  It will have some form of content negotiation, and an
equivalent to "Vary".  It will have persistent connections, and chunking.
Hopefully, it will also have mandatory extensions.

I'll stop there.  I think I've made my point. 8-)

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Monday, 18 March 2002 17:49:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:05 GMT