What Are the Payoffs for SOAP? (WAS RE: Comments on draft-hollenb eck-ietf-xml-guidelines-02.txt)

Not quite.  If path dependency for correct choices 
requires correct information, you still have the 
responsibility to educate the educators.
Then there are those nasty syntax issues.  You 
can't ever go home or on vacation again because 
the supply of people to be educated is endless.  :-)

Would the quote be more correct if it said:

"The Web is the set of *representations* that can be identified by a URI".

If true, then we know what the Web is.   Can someone tell me why 
given the URI identifies a WSDL, SOAP is a bad thing?  If 
an information owner chooses to hide representations behind a 
single URI, isn't that simply a bet on the payoffs of hiding 
the representations?  Fielding says, this is a bad bet but 
bases that on "unforeseen uses".  So he assumes payoffs but 
can't enumerate all of them.  The information is imperfect (second 
degree path dependency).  The REST advocates claim a potential 
third degree path dependency but can't prove it exists except 
insofar as the benefits of common interfaces are asserted.
At some point, some champion of SOAP must enumerate and 
defend the SOAP payoffs.  Then and only then can one begin to 
determine if a third degree path dependency exists.


-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com]

> My favorite definition for the web was one TimBL used a long time ago:
> "The Web is the set of 'things' that can be identified by a URI" (and that
> included physical objects!).  So, while you're only half kidding, I actually 
> prefer the idea. ;-)

Aha! Thus we can disband the TAG and most of the W3C and the IETF HTTP 
work and turn all the work over to the URI group and go back to writing 
code and taking vacations.  I *like* this approach:)  -Tim

Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 17:26:20 UTC