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

Re: D-AG0017 - Business Infrastructure

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:10:02 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200203162210.RAA05707@markbaker.ca>
To: ADavies@SeeBeyond.com (Alan Davies)
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Hi Alan,

> Do you consider that the invocation of a remote procedure (which is at least
> one purpose that POST is commonly used for nowadays) can be described as
> one, or perhaps two, distributed hypermedia state changes, or is it out of
> scope of that description?  

Well, any state change produced by an RPC invocation can be modelled as
a state change by an HTTP invocation (and vice-versa), if that's what you

> Logically a remote procedure call potentially involves the transfer of data
> to and from the remote procedure, and any state change is 'hidden' behind
> the remote procedure itself, so it would seem that it is out of scope of the
> description.
> If this is so, does this mean that HTTP should not be used for such
> purposes?

I'm not following you.

HTTP works under the following architectural constraints;
- all messages are sent to things with identity
- all methods used must be generic to all things with identity

So to answer that last question of yours at least, HTTP doesn't need to
carry RPC, because it can effect any state change without doing so.
Using RPC also removes all of the benefits of a generic interface;
improved visibility & security, a priori communication, optimizations
are applicable to the whole network, etc..

Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Saturday, 16 March 2002 17:05:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:40:55 UTC