RE: Issue 133: multple methods per URI

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net]
> Sent: 21 February 2002 19:56
> To: XML Distributed Applications List
> Subject: Issue 133: multple methods per URI
> 
> I see that this issue is closed-but-still-discussed ;)

Hi Mark, Paul,

The issue did get disscussed again on Wednesday's telcon (2/20) as part of
the review of action items. I drew attention to the concern with the WG
closing the issue raised by Paul Prescod, [1] and sequel. However, on the
basis that the nature of Web Architecture is a topic of continuing debate
within the TAG and elsewhere; and noting that the TAG has actioned further
liason between W3C and IETF [2,3] to expore the possibility of a new HTTP
method; there was *no* dissent amongst the WG members present on the call to
maintaining the closed status of this issue as reported in [4,5].

I was also actioned by the WG to reiterate that the WG regards issue 133 as
closed.

> One other aspect that I don't think got captured (in the issue
> description or resolution) is the concern over having multiple
> methods being identified by one URI. 

Nouning verbs... :-)

> I had a look at the issues list and didn't see another that covers
> this; it certainly seems to fit into 133 (although it seems to be
> specific to the RPC convention, rather than the HTTP binding).
> 
> Is there any WG position on this currently? My instinct is that it
> would be a Good Thing to have a 1->1 mapping, especially in light of
> the Web architecture.

I am not aware of any position on this within the WG.

> Cheers,
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Nottingham
> http://www.mnot.net/

Regards

Stuart
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Feb/0309.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/02/12-tagmem-irc
[3] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/02/13-minutes.html
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2002Feb/0011.html
[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Feb/0299.html