W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > November 2003

RE: HTTP binding options

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:59:54 -0800
To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>, "'Philippe Le Hegaret'" <plh@w3.org>
Cc: "'Web Services Description'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <006b01c3a7bc$d65598d0$6401a8c0@beasys.com>

Seems to me the two are related.  If REST guided HTTP's design, then taking
advantage of HTTP necessitates taking advantage of REST.  But I do like the
approach of playing up the HTTPness of the binding.  The fragments "Take
advantage of HTTP features" vs "Full REST support" seem to be either a bug
or a feature depending upon the person evaluating the fragment.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Mark Baker
> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 10:48 AM
> To: Philippe Le Hegaret
> Cc: Web Services Description
> Subject: Re: HTTP binding options
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:51:11AM -0500, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> > My concern here has nothing to do with REST, but with HTTP.
> We should
> > take advantage of its functionalities.
>
> FWIW, REST, or at least an important part of it, is a guide to how to
> take *full* advantage of HTTP.  So if, as you say, your
> concern is with
> HTTP, then it should also be with REST.
>
> Mark.
> --
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
>
>
Received on Monday, 10 November 2003 14:01:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:27 GMT