W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2012

Re: FYI, tag election links

From: Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:13:04 -0700
To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <20121213171304.9cc12f01.eric@bisonsystems.net>
>
> AWWW is outdated and should be revised or withdrawn.
>

As I didn't know about AWWW until another developer used it to explain
something to me, I assume I'm not the only one who's introduced other
developers to it.  I've used it to explain, or justify, implementation
details when handing projects over to, or consulting with, younger
developers.  Pretty much required, given my penchant for conneg.

Revising, I don't have a problem with per se.  In fact, I'm still
waiting for Volume 2, and maybe that's what's called for given that
Code on Demand is an optional constraint, rather than treating it as
the basis of some new and backwards-incompatible architecture requiring
a clean slate to define.  Or justification for not having a defined
architecture.

Over the past several years, I've watched certain solutions I advocate
go from the ivory tower, to being an everyday practical reality...

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/rest-discuss/message/19226
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/rest-discuss/message/19228

...which, to me, makes AWWW more relevant today by reinforcing certain
truths it's based on.  Indeed, resources do have representations; there
is a cost in moving data from point A to point B; the most efficient
network request is one which doesn't need to be made; and that the best
media types for anarchic scalability and user-perceived performance are
those which are processable as streams.

The result, is that working within the "web of documents" paradigm
remains valid, with ever-increasing scalability as the components which
make up the deployed infrastructure continue to evolve to support it --
even when it's to those components' developers' chagrin.  Some of the
Web, and perhaps most of it, will always fit the distributed hypermedia
application paradigm, so I believe we need to evolve from there rather
than pulling the rug out from under those developers who use AWWW in
favor of making up a new architecture as we go.

Not that I have a vote, just one developer's view from down in the
trenches.

-Eric
Received on Friday, 14 December 2012 00:13:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 14 December 2012 00:13:31 GMT