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

Testing Understanding of Architectural Principles

From: Walden Mathews <waldenm@optonline.net>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 10:55:38 -0400
To: "Newcomer, Eric" <Eric.Newcomer@iona.com>, edwink@collaxa.com, "Baker, Mark" <distobj@acm.org>, "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-id: <000a01c31e16$b6d60920$1702a8c0@WorkGroup>

> Yes, certainly, and any efforts in that direction will be well received,
I'm sure, as I believe they already have been.  The opposite also needs to
be true.

Eric, I'm not clear on your message.  You're saying both "sides" could use
some tool to
measure level of understanding?

>
> For example, in your list of questions, it is not a true or false question
about which is the better model for distributed applications, stateless or
stateful, since it depends on the individual application's requirements.

For question 3, assume it applies to ALL cases; then you can answer either
TRUE or FALSE.

>
> Can you also propose a list of questions for the REST folks to similarly
assist understanding of the opposite view?  That would be doubly helpful.

I could try, but it's hard for me.  It would be better/easier for someone
who a) feels they have a handle on the gist of SOA, and b) has observed
REST advocates (or others) misstating the principles thereof.

How about you?  Can you propose some of those questions?  Or maybe
outline some areas of weak understanding, and I'll help derive questions
from that?

--Walden

>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walden Mathews [mailto:waldenm@optonline.net]
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 8:09 AM
> To: Newcomer, Eric; edwink@collaxa.com; Baker, Mark; Cutler, Roger
> (RogerCutler)
> Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Web services are widely adopted ???
>
>
> > I am also not opposed to compromise, but compromise requires each side
to
> accept the validity of the other's view, and I had not been seeing that
> acceptance in many of the emails going back and forth, basically making
the
> same arguments as have been made for three years, and then stating that
the
> other side doesn't accept them because of a lack of understanding.  That
is
> just wrong and completely unhelpful to the WG's goals.
>
> Eric,
>
> Is there a polite way to assert that many still don't understand
> REST very well?  It's too bad there isn't a 100-question quiz
> for people to test their understanding, huh.  Personally, I think
> my understanding sucks (too little experience), but I can identify
> regular problems with this group around the following:
>
> What is an architectural constraint?
> Characterize at least two different kinds of application state.
> (T or F) The best distributed applications are "stateless".
> What is an "engine of application state"?
> What is it about hypertext that relates to state engines?
> Compare/contrast *idempotent* and *safe*.
> What does the Fielding thesis say about idempotent methods?
> What's wrong with PUT?
> What are the REST "verbs" (trick question)?
> (T or F) Adopting resource orientation means rewriting legacy apps.
> (T or F) Data encoded in XML are "visible" because XML is a standard.
>
> Need 89 more questions...
>
>
> --Walden
>
>
Received on Monday, 19 May 2003 10:51:22 GMT

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