- From: Paul Burchard <burchard@cs.princeton.edu>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 96 22:36:55 -0400
- To: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org, www-talk@w3.org
MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com> writes: > The majority of the designs anticipated using Java are > more properly handled when viewing Java as a new resource > type instead of linked hard with http/html. There is no "hard link" between Java and HTTP -- or for that matter, between HTML and HTTP. The whole point of a generic transfer protocol like HTTP is to handle "new resource types" without requiring a completely new protocol for every application. It's true that currently HTTP is suboptimal for transferring large numbers of small files (this is *not* a Java-specific problem), but HTTP/1.1 will alleviate the problem by standardizing persistent connections and pipelined requests. > Most critically the concept of clients sending applets *to* a > server to be executed on the server - this is outside the > scope of an httpd. So PUT and POST are outside the scope of HTTP? Russell Holt <holtrf@destinyusa.com> writes: > What about a java ORB? Now *this* makes some sense. For example, ILU will also be switching their "string binding handles" to URL syntax. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Burchard <burchard@cs.princeton.edu> ``I'm still learning how to count backwards from infinity...'' --------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Saturday, 1 June 1996 22:36:20 UTC