W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > July 2002

Re: FW: LC Comments: Web Method Feature

From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@rbii.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 21:26:17 -0400
To: "'xml-dist-app@w3.org'" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E17RjkX-0003oK-00@server2000.ebizhostingsolutions.com>

On Monday 08 July 2002 10:08 am, Walden Mathews wrote:
> I'm not sure I appreciate the distinction between "layering" and
> "inheritance" in this context.  When you "layer" TCP over IP, you
> "inherit" internetworking.  When you "layer" HTTP over TCP, you
> "inherit" streamed data and connection semantics and internetworking.

Whether it's inheritance (IMHO) depends largely on the exposed 
semantics/type. Layering tends to hide, inheritance tends toward agrregate 
interfaces. Nothing is ever quite black and white though.

> The practice of "dressing up" objects to look like something else
> seems more like a short term fix than an architecture choice, and
> my understanding is that this group is searching for durable
> design choices, not quick fixes.

A facade pattern is useful in many contexts, not always as a short term fix. 

> You seem to be saying that non-networked software is rife with the
> decay of the short term fix, and that therefore networking software
> must follow suit.  In a sense you are predicting the failure of
> the architecture group. (!) Is that a correct reading?

You're putting words in my mouth.... I was just identifying some of the 
pressures that could potentially lead to HTTP being wrapped or layered upon. 
I'm not sure how that equates to failure.
Received on Monday, 8 July 2002 21:25:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:10 GMT