RE: Proposal re REST and Arch doc

I think documenting the differences is an excellent way to move forward.

It will help us distill the properties of rest that are important vs the

features we think we need in the web services world. This should give us

a concrete base on which to debate whether deviations from each other
are a needed, good, 
bad or whatever without making judgment as to who are the heretics.

Martin.




> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mark Baker
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 11:48 AM
> To: Francis McCabe
> Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Proposal re REST and Arch doc
> 
> 
> 
> That's ok too, but it doesn't achieve what I want to achieve; 
> documenting the *differences*.
> 
> Is that so controversial?
> 
> We could even call it "Integrating WSA with Web 
> Architecture", just to make reference to our charter.
> 
> MB
> 
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 11:30:40AM -0700, Francis McCabe wrote:
> > Rather than a section on standard orthodoxies and heresies, 
> it may be
> > better to have a section that highlights the `input base' 
> ideas that the 
> > WSA draws from. That way, you can point out the 
> inheritances from REST, 
> > OMA etc. in a way that isn't threatening.
> 
> MB
> -- 
> Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
> Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
> http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2002 17:23:21 UTC