Re: AWWW second edition, maybe -- terminology

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > and service requests,
> >   and the protocols that support the interaction between agents in the
> >   space. We relate core design components, constraints, and good
> >   practices to the principles and properties they support.
> >
> > Does this look like the kind of direction we'd like to move in?
>
> Not IMO. I don't think any description of Web architecture is complete
> without acknowledging the distinction between the data and its source.
> AFAICT, the only way to do that is with a word that's synonymous with
> "resource".


Allow me to second Mark's excellent point that replacing "resource" with
"information and services" is a non-starter on the information side, and so
will devolve into the use of a single word roughly synonymous with
"resource". Allow me to also warn you that if that word ends up being
"service", the TAG will be creating a tsunami of confusion. Why? Because
much of the world was taught over the past few years to fundamentally
distinguish a Resource-Oriented Architecture (REST) and Service-Oriented
Architecture (WS-*). [1] [2]

If the TAG ends up saying that URLs refer to services, or god forbid,
service endpoints, we really will have entered a world of humpty-dumpty
semantics.

[1]
http://www.slideshare.net/iasadenver/resourceoriented-architecture-roa-and-rest
[2]
http://blog.dhananjaynene.com/2009/10/service-oriented-rest-architecture-is-an-oxymoron/

-- Nick

Nick Gall
Phone: +1.781.608.5871
Other Contact Info: http://bit.ly/nickgall