- 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>
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 UTC