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

RE: Roy's ApacheCon presentation

From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 16:16:59 -0500
Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E404779D3E@usmsg03.sagus.com>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:anne@manes.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 3:46 PM
> To: Mark Baker; Champion, Mike
> Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Roy's ApacheCon presentation
> 
>
> But from my perspective, most "real" Web 
> services ... will require SOAP headers for security, 
> management, reliability, message coordination, etc. The REST approach 
> can't address these requirements.

Before Mark says a lot of stuff I don't agree with about reliability and
message coordination :-) let me jump in to defend REST in this context:  One
COULD use GET/PUT to transfer SOAP messages with the security, etc. headers;
they would not HAVE to be POSTed.  I can imagine this being done in a
RESTfully correct way (although there is some point of doctrine about PUT
not allowing any processing such as a SOAP-compliant system would do).  One
could even hope that WSDL 1.2 will support a definition of all this,
although I don't know if that is  realistic.

This leads us back into a familiar tar pit: at the F2F, a number of people
(with the vociferous exception of one prominent person!) expressed the
belief that we really have to define once and for all what a 'web service'
is... or at least define what this "thingies" are that we are defining the
architecture of :-)
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2002 16:17:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:10 GMT