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

Re: Visibility (was Re: Introducing the Service Oriented Architec tural style, and it's constraints and properties.

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 11:00:53 -0500
To: "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
Cc: "'www-ws-arch@w3.org '" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20030226110053.A22821@www.markbaker.ca>

> Do I detect a trout hole again ... anyway here goes ... comments in line ...

Yes, we're quickly closing in on well worn arguments, so I'll leave it
at this, which *has* already been said, but not recently ...

On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 03:18:48AM -0800, Burdett, David wrote:
> <DB>We need to define what we mean by an "application" if you mean it is
> anything above the transport layer, then you are correct but really I think
> the layers are typically: Operating System, App Server, "Web Services
> Middleware", Application.

The *critical* thing that one has to accept in order to understand REST,
is that application protocol methods are the same as operations in an
API, i.e. at the same layer of the stack as "getStockQuote" or
"purchaseBook".  If you just take this as a given for a moment, you'll
see that all the arguments I've ever made on this subject become a big,
complex, yet entirely self-consistent description of much of Web
architecture, and indeed several other Internet scale architectures.  If
you don't accept it, then I probably come off as a loon, which I
completely understand because I thought the same thing of some guys who
saying that to me back in 97/98 (Dan Connolly and Roy Fielding, FWIW).

So, a *rhetorical* question for those of you who don't believe that
GET is at the same layer as getStockQuote; what would you call a
protocol that does have a "getStockQuote" method?  Note; "application
protocol" is already taken. 8-)

MB
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2003 10:57:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:15 GMT