- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 01:21:47 -0400
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: public-web-http-desc@w3.org
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 09:05:41PM -0700, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Agreed; I can see how you read that into the first one (which is why > I don't have much taste for it), but how does that follow from the > second one (tarawa-style, for those that remember)? ( as you clarified off-line, "first" and "second" refer to the examples here; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-http-desc/2005Jun/0082.html ) It doesn't, I like the second example, except for one minor concern that's not worth mentioning here (unless you meant to expose "resolveChild" as an operation over the network). > POST is a special case here, of course; that said, it should still be > defined in terms of POST-this-media-type-to-get-that-one. I'm not sure why POST is a special case, but I agree with that recommendation. Cheers, Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com
Received on Monday, 20 June 2005 05:21:09 UTC