Re: Interaction model vs data model

On 24 Jan 2013, at 18:25, "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com> wrote:

> hello kingsley.
> 
> On 2013-01-24 17:59 , "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>> On 1/24/13 11:40 AM, Wilde, Erik wrote:
>>> i am certainly using "link" in the REST sense: references that clients
>>> are expected to follow in their application flow, and where the behavior
>>> is defined by the protocol (the media type). if that may cause
>>> confusion, what about hyperlink, following the recent trend that one of
>>> the essences of REST is that it's hypermedia?
>> Is a Content-type (or media type) a protocol? Isn't that metadata for
>> the resource denoted by the link? Basically, the description of the data
>> de-referenced by the link.
> 
> any content type that uses links (i.e., goes beyond simple image/gif kind
> of standalone data formats) essentially is a protocol: it defines rules
> how interactions between clients and servers are possible, and what they
> mean.

Aïïï! this is very confused though I see what you are trying to get at. We're
going to have to be careful in this space about how our use of terminology.

We have two elements here: the documents and the protocol (which most of
us regard HTTP as being a clear case of).  The area of philosophy where 
these two is known as pragmatics. For example one distinguishes between
the content of a sentence, and what one does with it.  For example given 
the sentence A

  A: "The blue chair is outside"@en

Here are two ways to use it

  B: Joe make it the case that "the blue chair is outside"@en .
  C: Joe is it the case that "the blue chair is outside"@en ?
 
Each one of these does something with the sentence "The blue chair is outside", but the
meaning of A does not change in each sentence thereafter. B is an order, C is a question.
Notice that B, and  C, sentences that appear in a social context and that use A. 
We don't have to repeat them all the time. We could just refer to them, so that we 
could continue with examples such as 

   D: I promise to make it be A .
   E: I swear that A .
   F: Sorry I was wrong that A .
   
Promising, or swearing is an event. In some situations one puts one's hand 
up to do this.  This event can be given a name: the promising or swearing
of A. Call one such event Ev1.  Creating such events is what POSTing allows 
us to do. 

  The web allows us to give names to every thing we find with a URL. So we
can give names to things that create promising events, and we can describe
the types of promising that can be made there.... This is done by looking
at documents that describe things.

  So we have a declarative side of things. And we have a protocol side 
of things. We are between "Saying and Doing" as Robert Brandom's recent 
book is called. 

	I'll keep you updated when I can make it even clearer....

> 
> cheers,
> 
> dret.
> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/