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

Re: Protocol independence

From: Mike Champion <mc@xegesis.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 16:24:03 -0500
To: www-ws@w3.org
Message-id: <oprm4i2dycezizxn@smtp.comcast.net>

On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 14:00:22 -0500, Mark Baker <mbaker@idokorro.com> wrote:

>
> The choice to use GET vs POST to retrieve stuff is most
> definitely an architectural decision, because the properties of
> the architecture depend on that choice.  If you choose to use GET
> to retrieve data, your system demonstrates greater visibility than
> if you were to use POST.  That's why the TAG says stuff like;
>
> "Safe operations (read, query, view, ask, lookup, etc.) on HTTP
> resources SHOULD be implemented using GET"
> -- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/get7
>
> Now *that's* architectural guidance! 8-)

Well, I think it's best practice guidance.  (note the SHOULD as opposed to 
MUST).  I agree that SOAP 1.2 is better off having a mechanism so as to 
give the binding a hint that if the operation requested is "safe" so that 
the appropriate message transport mechanism-level operation is requested.  
I guess we will continue to disagree because you see these as fundamental 
architectural principles, and I see them as implementation optimizations 
and best practice guidelines.

Maybe that makes me a Reformed RESTifarian, and you and Orthodox 
RESTifarian :-)

[See http://www.rdfrost.com/Reference/Religion/Heretic_Scum.html  -- maybe 
I'm a Reformed RESTifarian Reformation of SOAP 1.2 and you're a Reformed 
RESTifarian Reformation of Fielding's Thesis :-) :-) ]
Received on Friday, 4 April 2003 16:25:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:41 GMT