- From: Bullard, Claude L \(Len\) <len.bullard@intergraph.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:15:24 -0600
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
Depends on the drugs. I knew a pizza delivery man... Just an aside: I spent last week at a standards meeting where a tool for creating XML Schemas was being applied to a messaging standard. Some of your observations with regards to the parsimony of HTTP were clearly pertinent. Turning nouns and verbs extracted by interview makes for a very complex document, and a way overbuilt messaging system. Eventually, it was tossed out and we turned to scenario design which proved to get better results but still overbuilt. When designing messaging payloads, what is the best approach? len From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Roy T. Fielding Just to be clear, since it seems to have been lost in the noise, I do believe that the finding applies equally to SOAP and WSDL. Under no circumstances is a directory service more authoritative than the service itself. A discrepancy may indicate an error in either the directory or the service, but the agent must treat the service as authoritative because it is far more likely to be aware of its own evolution over time than a disconnected directory. This is no different from looking up a pharmacy in a phone book and, upon calling the number supplied, discovering that a car salesman answers the phone. One should not attempt to buy drugs from the car salesman just because the phonebook said they are a pharmacy. ....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 29 March 2006 20:15:08 UTC