- From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 15:40:45 -0700
- To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- CC: Paul Denning <pauld@mitre.org>, www-archive@w3.org, moreau@crf.canon.fr, Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote: > > >I have not proposed any details of URI encoding. I am proposing > >guidelines on the URI-to-resource mapping. Nevertheless, I would accept > >text in the Primer. > > Have you seen the section in part 2 [1] that talks about how parameters > that are used to identify resources should be part of the URI? This is > entirely independent of the request method used (in HTTP-speak), just > saying that parameters that in some sense identify a resource should > when possible be part of the URI. >... Okay, I agree with that section and agree that it is highly related to my issue. There is one important part I do not understand. Why is this "best practice" under the title "RPC" in both the SOAP primer and the SOAP Part 2? If you were using a pure document-style of interaction would not the same best practice apply? I believe that SOAP's definition of RPC is: "the exchange of messages that map conveniently to definitions and invocations of method and procedure calls in commonly used programming languages". If so, why would proper use of URIs on the Web and in HTTP be tied to RPC? As you know, many of us see disciplined HTTP usage as an *alternative* to RPC! Until I hear back, I consider this a bug, but my level of stridency on the issue will depend upon the cost of fixing it. The primer, especially, seems quite easy to fix (at least technically, I don't know about procedurally). Merely replace the word "RPC" with "message" or "message exchanges" (or some more appropriate word of your choice). "Conveying web-friendly message exchanges" and "There are many instances where message exchanges are designed for uses which..." If something like that were done I would not push for any changes to the normative specification. Also, the primer section is a little bit confusingly written in that it seems as if 3.1.3 is entirely about "pure information retrieval" applications until you get close to the end. If it is still possible to do some re-arrangement that does not change the meaning then I would be glad to propose alternate text. -- Come discuss XML and REST web services at: Open Source Conference: July 22-26, 2002, conferences.oreillynet.com Extreme Markup: Aug 4-9, 2002, www.extrememarkup.com/extreme/
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2002 18:41:50 UTC