- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: 18 Mar 2002 19:36:38 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 18:23, David Orchard wrote: > Noah and I share the viewpoint that protocol evolution is a good and natural > thing. My reason is because I don't think that the everything that we want > to do in the future should be modeled as propagation of a shared information > space. For example, the assumptions of cardinalities of identified > resources might not hold. Adn the propagation issues may be different > depending upon the application. A concrete example that I like is thinking > about reliable delivery of a stock quote message. From the queue software's > perspective, this is a POST. But from the stock quote applications > perspective, this is a GET. So I want to POST a GET request ;-). > > Perhaps the real issue isn't http, but whether a shared information space is > the way that we should think about future applications that we want to > build. Is it fair to question whether that kind of evolution is in fact evolution away from the Web? I'm not arguing that it isn't worth pursuing in general, but a shared information space seems pretty fundamental to notions of the Web. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
Received on Monday, 18 March 2002 18:32:15 UTC