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

Re: Proposed text for section 1.6.2 and 1.6.3

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 15:48:07 -0400
To: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
Cc: "Damodaran, Suresh" <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org, w3c-wsa-editors@w3.org
Message-ID: <20030507154807.G2149@www.markbaker.ca>

FWIW, I *really* like how Mike has described the RESTful Web as a
"subset" of the Web, because it is *exactly* that.  I fully agree
with him below too.

Also, the "architectural style of the WWW" has not been written down
yet, AFAIK, though I may have said a few things about my position on
that  on this list.  REST is Roy's view of what constraints make the
best Web apps, and I agree with him on that.  But non-RESTful things
are part of the Web too, such as cookies.

On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 08:53:12AM -0600, Champion, Mike wrote:
> > 1. Historically, REST style *is* more or less the 
> > architectural style of the WWW 
> > (whether we like it or not!). Not saying it as such would be rewriting
> > history.
> 
> So what are you suggesting ... to eliminate the distinction betweeen
> "the Web" and "REST".  I could live with that, I think, but I don't
> feel comfortable implying that all the non-RESTful stuff
> (CGI scripts, cookies, and statefulness maintained by 
> application servers) is not "the Web."  <grin>
> 
> I think I know where you're going -- maybe I cut TOO sharp a 
> distinction between the Web and the RESTful subset of the
> Web -- but would appreciate specific wording suggestions from
> Suresh or anyone who agrees with him.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 15:46:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:18 GMT