Re: Remaining draft CSFs/requirements for AG003

Just to get some +1s in here...

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 09:58:57AM -0400, Hugo Haas wrote:
> FWIW, I would rephrase this slightly to make it more precise than just
> "Web-friendly":
> 
>   AG003 Integration to the World Wide Web
>   The Web Services Architecture must be consistent with the current
>   and future evolution of the World Wide Web.

+1

> |   D-AC011
> |          is consistent with the architectural principles and design
> |          goals of the existing(?) Web. These principles and design goals
> |          are roughly outlined in [TAGTOC], [AXIOMS], [WEBAT50K], and in
> |          [REST].
> 
> I believe that "existing" should be dropped, and maybe also "roughly".

+1.  "roughly" may have a role, as there are some important
(but fringe) inconsistencies between those documents.  Or perhaps we
could pick a better word - I could live with "roughly" though.

> |               o D-AC011.2.1 Uses a standard identifier technology (URI)
> 
> I believe that this one is unnecessary because:
> - URIs are one of the core elements of the Web.
> - AR009.3 covers this and even goes further.

Sure, +1.

> |               o D-AC011.2.2 Uses a standard transport/transfer
> |                 technology
> 
> I am not sure what the CSF calls for. I am hesitating between
> providing a standard interface to Web services as Web resources,
> calling for the use of HTTP...
> 
> I looked for the history of the CSF[2] and couldn't find where it was
> coming from.
> 
> I would suggest that the originator clarifies his intentions. If not,
> I would be for dropping it: I don't feel that we need to expand on
> what the Web architectural principles are.

+1

> I think that AC011 is lacking one subgoal to be complete. New
> technologies recommended must be designed in a Web-friendly way. I
> would therefore add (based on D-AC011.2):
> 
>   D-AC011.3 recommends the design of new Web technologies that adhere
>   to the architectural and design principles of the Web to provide
>   functional coverage of the responsibilities and constraints for an
>   identified architectural component.

Hmm, that wasn't there already?  Wow.  Ok, +1.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com

Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 10:56:17 UTC