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

Re: Data Flow

From: Jan Algermissen <jalgermissen@topicmapping.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:14:37 +0200
Message-ID: <3F87D80D.71666454@topicmapping.com>
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, www-ws@w3.org


Mark Baker wrote:
> FWIW, using a RESTful approach to composition seems to simplify things
> greatly.  As each resource is a potential data source (via its state),
> this enables composition to be described with containment relations.
> For example, a description of the pipe "A | B" might be;
> <Container rdf:about="B">
>   <contains/>
>     <Container rdf:about="A"/>
> </Container>
> That doesn't say who does the binding, i.e. whether B invoked GET on A,
> or A invoked POST on B, or even if C invoked GET on A and POST on B ...
> but the flow (aka route) is the same in all those cases.

This is very interesting. What I don't quite understand is how the
containment relates to the pipe? Is your thinking that, for example'
a POST to A results in a subsequent POST to B?

Hmm, or would a change in A's state imply a change in B's state since
B contains A?

IOW, what is the relationship between resource-resource containment and
resource state? 

Is it defined anywhere what containment of resource in resource means/implies?

Wonder how that relates to the "nested containers" discussion[1]
(e.g. what are the implications for list items to be contained in

Anyhow, just vague thoughts.... 


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Oct/0077.html

> Mark.
> --
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca

Jan Algermissen                           http://www.topicmapping.com
Consultant & Programmer	                  http://www.gooseworks.org
Received on Saturday, 11 October 2003 06:09:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:37:10 UTC