W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > February 2003

RE: Resource definition

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:36:01 -0800
To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: "'Cutler, Roger \(RogerCutler\)'" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Message-ID: <012001c2d79e$1d9bce70$f10ba8c0@beasys.com>

I don't like it, as there are others out there, like Roy's and RDF.  And it
hasn't helped with our debate about whether a service is a resource or not.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 2:31 PM
> To: David Orchard
> Cc: 'Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)'; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Resource definition
>
>
> Dave,
>
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 12:59:09PM -0800, David Orchard wrote:
> > 1. The W3C TAG should darned well write up what a resource
> is from a web
> > architecture perspective.
>
> Doesn't this count?
>
>   "A resource is defined by [RFC2396] to be anything that has
> identity."
>    -- http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#identification
>
> Or did you want something more specific than a punt to 2396?
> Personally, I'm quite happy with the punt.
>
> > 2. The WS-Arch group ought to relate a service to a
> resource *somehow*
>
> I'd suggest that;
>
> "All Web services have identity, and are therefore resources."
>
> is as far as we can go with that, at least until the
> definition of what
> a Web service is, is figured out.  The current one is still
> very fuzzy,
> IMO.
>
> MB
> --
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
> Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
>
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2003 17:38:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:14 GMT