Generic/specific connectors

(woohoo, got email)

Hi Eric,

> Anyway, let me try to summarize my views for a new thread and let's see if we can move toward convergence.

Rather than respond to that point in the new thread, I'll just respond
here.  You suggest that the architecture should permit both generic and
specific interfaces.

I suggest that this is either impossible, or that you are in effect
designing two systems, depending upon whether you think that's a valid
thing to do or not - I don't think it is.  As you define the rest of
the architecture, you won't be able to assume anything about connector
semantics, which will impact the overall architecture substantially.

Architectural constraints are a *good* thing, not a bad thing.  They
don't necessarily (like generic interfaces) restrict *what* can be
done, only *how* they're done.  You can have too many, as Gopher
demonstrated, but you can also have too few.  Web services provide too
few constraints because they're missing the architectural constraint
that *EVERY* single successful system on the Internet has; generic
connector semantics.

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, 22 July 2002 17:28:59 UTC