Re: Identification of documents in Web applications

1+ -- articulating this in terms of continuations is
illuminating. 

Nathan writes:
 > T.V Raman wrote:
 > > Some thoughts from the past:
 > > 
 > > ? and # are symmetric -- ? is server-side # is client-side. One
 > > of the inconsistencies in web-arch as defined is that it perhaps
 > > fail to recognize this symmetry fully.
 > 
 > That sentence alone is very clarifying :) - and as Jeni noted, 
 > developers are already using the two symmetrically, using paths and 
 > key=value pairs in fragments.
 > 
 > > Secondly, I believe there is a continuum from documents to
 > > applications, an application with 0 interactivity is perhaps a
 > > document. Another way to look at this is:
 > > 
 > > "The Document Is The Interface"  but "The Interface Is Not  A
 > > Document"  --- An interface is actually a collection of
 > > documents, where each document snapshots a particular state in
 > > the overall app;ication interaction.
 > 
 > This is a very interesting line of thought, so we could see the new 
 > twitter site (for example) as providing a document which may have 
 > potentially infinite states, and the server as providing a snapshot of 
 > that document in a state from which the others can be composed by the 
 > client (a continuation even), and fragments as being references to one 
 > of those composed states.
 > 
 > This would be a very useful and efficient pattern for clients, servers 
 > and the network; indeed without it each possible document state would 
 > need to be generated, stored and then referenced and cached around the 
 > web, which is almost infeasible.
 > 
 > I guess in to this comes references to composite resource state (as with 
 > the hash-bang cases and Ashok's hashInURIs write up).
 > 
 > One could say that both servers and clients now have an equal role in 
 > composing and controlling resource state, with resource representations 
 > over the wire being continuations. Perhaps it could be suggested that 
 > the universal interface works in both directions, hiding the 
 > implementation details on both sides, exposing only the interface and 
 > using resource identifiers and continuations with a well known media 
 > type to transfer state between components...
 > 
 > I'll stop here, but interesting to say the least..
 > 
 > Best,
 > 
 > Nathan
 > 
 > > Noah Mendelsohn writes:
 > >  > I've posted some thoughts at [1] on the identification of documents in Web 
 > >  > applications. This relates to the draft Ashok is editing on client-side 
 > >  > URIs [2](titled: "Repurposing the Hash Sign for the New Web", though one of 
 > >  > the points in my posting is that we need to look at "?" as well as "#", so 
 > >  > I'd really like to change that title.)
 > >  > 
 > >  > The posting also relates to the hash-bang #! controversy, and I'll be 
 > >  > scheduling a discussion of that for Thursday. Please try to read both my 
 > >  > posting [1] and Jeni's [3] before this week's call. Last I heard from Amy, 
 > >  > Tim will be joining us. I expect to do the agenda tomorrow morning.  Thank you.
 > >  > 
 > >  > Noah
 > >  > 
 > >  > [1] 
 > >  > http://blog.arcanedomain.com/2011/03/identifying-documents-in-web-applications/
 > >  > [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/02/HashInURI-20110208
 > >  > [3] http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/154
 > > 

--

Received on Thursday, 10 March 2011 01:05:38 UTC