Re: Firewall sample application and requirements

On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 11:00:35AM -0400, Champion, Mike wrote:
> > As I see it, you and David seem to believe that while REST is useful for
> > some things, that there are things (substantial things, that are worth
> > worrying about) that Web services can do that can't be reasonably done
> > within the constraints of REST.  Is that true?
> 
> That is my current working assumption, yes.  I personally would be happy to
> be convinced that it is wrong, but you're not doing a great job of that :~)

8-(  This is tough stuff.  I don't expect to convince *everybody*, just
one or maybe two people.  But I do hope to get everybody else at least
thinking that there might be another way of solving the same problems,
using technology that's been right under their noses for the past 7 or 8
years.

> But irrespective my personal philosophy, it's very clear that a LOT of
> people in the industry find a compelling use case for things that apparently
> do not fall within the constraints of REST, so to declare them out of scope
> for the WSA at the requirements phase strikes me as a complete non-starter.
> I suspect we'd lose about 3/4 of our participants if this were to happen,
> because this WG would be seen as irrelevant to the problem it was chartered
> to address!

I think most members participating in this activity just want to be able
to use the Web in a more reliable, transactable, <insert buzzword here>
manner.  I think many would be relieved to find out that there really
isn't that much work required to accomplish this.

If the Web services activity produced a set of extensions for hypertext
that did what the members needed, even though it didn't look like CORBA,
would anybody really care?

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

Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 13:38:13 UTC