RE: Separate concepts for "service" and "targetResource?" (was RE: /service/@targetResource ?)

Oh oh, looking at [2] it seems that somebody has been looking at the concept of resource as a way to define semantic equivalence among services. If that is the case, we might be dealing with the mother of all trouts ...

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 10:35 AM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Separate concepts for "service" and 
> "targetResource?" (was
> RE: /service/@targetResource ?)
> 
> 
> 
> I have a related but different concern than Ugo.
> 
> There will be services that operate on no resources (i.e. those with
> no state), services that operate on one resource, and services that
> operate on many resources.  More importantly, there will be services
> that operate on resources whose identity is only determined 
> at runtime,
> and I suggest that this will be the common case, not the exception.
> That pretty much rules out specifying this information as part of the
> interface, I believe.
> 
> This seems like a really wacky idea to me, but I'd like to know more
> about the problem that this attempts to solve.  As Arthur 
> described[1],
> it sounded more like documentation than anything, but it seems from
> further discussion[2] that it may be more.
> 
>  [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003May/0048.html
>  [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003May/0059.html
> 
> MB
> -- 
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
> Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
>   Actively seeking contract work or employment
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2003 13:45:33 UTC