- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 16:42:40 +0100
- To: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> > I agree with Sanjiva. I don't see how WS-RF can be considered as > > RESTful. I would say that WS-RF builds an object-oriented or > > resource-oriented view of the world using angle brackets but I wouldn't > > call that REST. But then again... that's just me :-) > > I didn't go that far. I know your feelings about WS-RF :-) .. > Never tried to hide them :-)) > WS-RF builds a world where things have WS-Addressing EPRs. That's it. > The rest (or the REST ;-)) of it is a figment of your imagination. > Yes, I know... I have a vivid imagination :-) I imagine a world where an object is defined as having state, a pointer, and an interface. Now, it's just happens that in this imaginative world, a resource, as defined by WS-RF, has state (explicit modelling of state outside a service's boundaries), has a pointer (the EPR), and has an "interface" (the WSDL interface of the service providing access to it). Now, even if the intention is not to treat resources in this manner, I see lots and lots in the Grid community treating WS-Resources in exactly this way. But as I said... that's just me :-)) .savas.
Received on Monday, 5 July 2004 11:43:22 UTC