W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > February 2004

Safety and WSDL

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:54:38 -0500
To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040214225438.C19674@www.markbaker.ca>

On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 05:20:32PM -0800, David Orchard wrote:
> I strongly disagree that there isn't experience in the web architecture wrt
> "safe" operations.  In fact, I'd argue that the web architecture is
> completely dependent upon GET being "safe".

Yup.  The Web wouldn't work at all if GET could not be assumed safe.

>  Because it's safe, it can be
> the default method used to retrieve a representation given a URI.  So we
> have the entire web to show as experience wrt safe operations.  People want
> the same facilities that GET offers but in a more protocol neutral manner.

Well, the experience we have with GET and safety is that it's valuable
to have a means for permitting untrusted parties to share information
safely.  But is it still needed when the parties are trusted, as they
need to be with SOA/Web-services?

Or, put another way, are you going to invoke the "JwerijErjkjdf" method
just because you know it's safe?  No, of course not.  You going to
invoke it because you need it to do what it's defined to do.  Safety can
be communicated when you learn what that is (presumably via some human
processable specification published by the service provider).

Mark.
Received on Saturday, 14 February 2004 22:54:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:26 UTC