W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Web Architecture

From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:21:59 -0400
Message-ID: <503ABDA7.8030702@arcanedomain.com>
To: BillClare3@aol.com
CC: www-tag@w3.org, timbl@w3.org, ashok.malhotra@oracle.com, ossi@w3.org, ossi.nykanen@tut.fi, ht@inf.ed.ac.uk, masinter@adobe.com, ylafon@w3.org, jeni@jenitennison.com, robin@berjon.com, jeff@w3.org
Bill,

Thank you so much for your contribution. Let's see whether some of the 
TAG's members have comments on this. I have only had time for a quick skim: 
based on that, there are at least a few high level concerns that occur to me:

* The Web is, obviously, a system that is already deployed on a massive 
scale. The AWWW document written in 2004 is not an attempt to craft an 
ideal architecture for a global information system in the abstract, 
although it does make some effort to identify general principles. Rather it 
attempts to document the architecture of the Web as it is now, and as it 
may evolve incrementally from the base we have. I don't see in your draft a 
lot of connection to the existing core mechanisms of the Web, such as URIs, 
HTTP, etc.

* Two key concerns in the design of the Web is scalability and 
discoverability, I.e. the ability for users and software to dynamically 
explore the Web by following links. As described in the Self-Describing Web 
[1], the system is architected to ensure that, with knowledge of the URI 
specification and the specifications to which it transitively refers, 
clients can correctly interact with resources and correctly interpret the 
responses they receive (or else discover reliably that they are not 
prepared for such correct interpretation.) It's not immediately obvious to 
me how your proposal addresses such concerns.

Thank you again for offering this proposal.

Noah Mendelsohn
Chair: W3C Technical Architecture Group

On 8/26/2012 6:59 PM, BillClare3@aol.com wrote:
> W3C TAG members,
>
>    It seems typical that over time architecture groups start with broad
> visions and then tend to become focused on more and more narrow issues.So
> with all the accelerating innovations spawned by the Web is it time for a
> revisiting of a broad vision ?
>
>     I suspect many might wish to answer yes to that question, but would
> question how to proceed.Attached is a short paper that was written for a
> slightly different purpose, but which tries to address the question from
> perspectives of XML language and standards, from that of models and
> frameworks, from that of integration of resources, data, services and uses,
> and ultimately from the perspective of applications.In particular, the
> paper focuses directly on basic architecture principles, identified by the
> W3C, as orthogonality, extensibility, error handling and
> interoperability.In addition it attempts at a basis for completeness as a
> framework for applications and their development. It is much simpler in
> content and at a higher level than the W3C recommendation on Web
> architecture from 2004 – and perhaps that is a good thing.
>
>     So is it time for new foundations?And is this feasible ?
>
>     Perhaps these notes can useful for stimulating discussion within the
> group and might be useful for soliciting formal sponsorship.
>
> Thanks for your consideration.
>
>
> *         Bill Clare**
> *
>
Received on Monday, 27 August 2012 00:22:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:47 UTC