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

Re: REST, uniformity and semantics

From: Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 13:58:25 -0700
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
To: Walden Mathews <waldenm@optonline.net>
Message-Id: <F878F568-8717-11D7-801B-000393A3327C@fla.fujitsu.com>


On Thursday, May 15, 2003, at 10:00  AM, Walden Mathews wrote:

>
>>> "REST is really a semantic issue"
>>
>> This is shorthand for: the REST constraints represent constraints on
>> the semantics of message delivery.
>
> The context was a little choppy, granted, but my objections
> remain.  You either mean
>
>     (1) that REST imposes meaning on message exchange, or
>     (2) every REST constraint is about the elevation of meaning
>     [(3) I don't know what you mean, and my head hurts]
>
> My counter to (1) is that constraint lending meaning (at least
> in someone's eyes) is a universal concept, not specific to REST

True, but REST imposes particular constraints; not constraints in some 
vague sense. Sure, constraints lend meaning is a fairly universal human 
approach to making sense of the world.

The particular constraints that REST imposes include enclosing a 
representation of state, and the use of particular verbs with 
particular meaning.

The stateless server constraint has a lot to do with interpreting the 
message: the server is not *supposed* to take into account any state 
information not present in the message. That is squarely a level 2 
constraint and it has a lot to do with conveying meaning.

Frank
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2003 16:58:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:19 GMT