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

RE: Proposed text on reliability in the web services architecture

From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 11:40:01 -0500
Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E404B6E045@usmsg03.sagus.com>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bhaugen [mailto:linkage@interaccess.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 11:26 AM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Proposed text on reliability in the web services
> architecture
> In my ordinary OO design, I have orders, products, etc.
> Why aren't those perfectly good Web resources with representations
> responding to GET?

Uhh, it would tightly couple the object's class structure to the XML
representation?  There is far more data encapsulated by the object than the
web service client needs?  I dunno ... but I've learned over the years that
"perfectly good" ideas aren't always the optimal design decisions.  I for
one want the WSA to help guide people to make good decisions in their
environments, not insist on a one size fits all architecture.

> What is the essential difference between an XML serialization
> and a representation?

Beats me. I guess an XML serialization is one possible representation, a
Java serialization would be another, and --dare I say it -- a CORBA IDL
interface might be another.  I'm sure the latter is not RESTifarically
correct, but the whole POINT of OO is to separate interface from
implementation details, no?
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2003 11:40:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:02 UTC