W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > August 2002

Re: Choreography and REST

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 10:09:50 -0400
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF6409F848.AA3F4175-ON85256C11.004A3D34@rchland.ibm.com>


Mark,

Please see below.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624



                                                                                                                                  
                      Mark Baker                                                                                                  
                      <distobj@acm.org>        To:       "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>                      
                      Sent by:                 cc:       www-ws-arch@w3.org                                                       
                      www-ws-arch-reque        Subject:  Re: Choreography and REST                                                
                      st@w3.org                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                  
                      08/10/2002 12:00                                                                                            
                      AM                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                  



Mark Baker wrote:

<snip/>

The main characteristic of REST relevant to choreographing processes, or
indeed any change of app state, is "hypermedia as the engine of
application state"(*).  That is, instead of explicitly invoking methods
to change state, the change is implicit by virtue of a URI being
declared together with the knowledge that GET on that URI will effect
the state change.

<cbf>
This would be a violation of Web architecture. GET operations are supposed
to be
side effect free. A GET is supposed to be a "safe" operation. You don't
change
state with GET. You might GET a representation, tweak it and then PUT it
back
to effect a state change. You might GET a representation of a resource
which
is an HTML form, complete the form and POST it to the URI associated with
the
form's, but you are NEVER supposed to effect change via GET.
</cbf>

(*) "The model application is therefore an engine that moves from one state
to the next by examining and choosing from among the alternative state
transitions in the current set of representations. Not surprisingly, this
exactly matches the user interface of a hypermedia browser. However, the
style does not assume that all applications are browsers. In fact, the
application details are hidden from the server by the generic connector
interface, and thus a user agent could equally be an automated robot
performing information retrieval for an indexing service, a personal agent
looking for data that matches certain criteria, or a maintenance spider
busy patrolling the information for broken references or modified content."

 --
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm#sec_5_3_3

<cbf>
We're not building bots or spiders that merely chase down links and snarf
information
from the representations those links return. If you want to follow this
analogy, what we're
doing is building software agents that replace the human element in the
completion of
the equivalent of an HTML form returned on a GET on a URI. This is where
things start to
get tricky. This is where you need to have a priori understanding of what
"form" to expect
such that the logic necessary to complete the "form" can be encoded in the
"client".

You cannot expect the software agent retrieving such a representation to be
capable of dealing with uncertainty as to what it might anticipate it would
be asked for in completing the "form".

A human interacting with Amazon.com to purchase a book can deal with the
unexpected because they can reason about it. It isn't like they need some
manner of brain transplant in order to complete an unanticipated form so
that
they can proceed with their purchase as might be the case if Amazon decided
to
interject a questionaire between the book selection step in a process and
the
final submission of the credit card payment information. If the same
situation
were presented to a software agent that hadn't been programmed to deal with
the questionaire, it would suffer a nervous breakdown and be unable to
complete
the process.

In the case where there's a human involved, the agent (human) can work his
way through a process directed by the server without ever having been told
what process to expect. It is a bit premature to expect that the average
software engineer can construct software agents with the same degree of
daring. Sure, there's some seriously advanced work being done in this vein
but it isn't yet at the level that is accessible to your average software
engineer.
</cbf>

<snip/>
Received on Saturday, 10 August 2002 10:35:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:04 GMT