- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:13:14 -0400
- To: "Www-Ws-Arch@W3. Org" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E405773E3C@usmsg03.sagus.com>
-----Original Message----- From: Walden Mathews [mailto:waldenm@optonline.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 1:45 PM To: Champion, Mike; Www-Ws-Arch@W3. Org Subject: Re: Is This a Web Service? I disagree about the "how to construct the URL" part -- that's brittle at best. Uhh, yes, that's one big reason why SOAP and WSDL looked attractive to people who were tired of CGI hackery a few years ago -- "just give me an endpoint to POST to and let me parse a rigorously defined message body to figure out what to do." If I were a RESTifarian, I'd be agitating for *less* brittle ways of defining URI interfaces. The handling of forms should be considered in the set of "generic web protocols". And I'm not clear on your requirements about the format. Are you saying that if the service just says "responses are in XHTML" that would be good enough? Not if the consumer is a software agent rather than a human! The service definition would have to say things like "The data returned is in an XHTML table with the ID [or class, or whatever] attribute "foo"; each returned record [or book, or website, whatever] is contained in one row of the table ... the first column is a unique label, the second colum is the URI of the matching resource, the third is a human readable description, the fourth is the date the referenced resource was last updated." Obviously one SHOULD do this with a schema language of some sort.
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2003 14:13:22 UTC