- From: bhaugen <linkage@interaccess.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 14:38:16 -0600
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> SOAP + WSDL or DAML-S would be one way to go. > REST + X might be another > if someone took the effort to fill in the 'X'. But that, unfortunately, > seems to be something that REST fans haven't been particularly willing > to explore ... other than a few vague gestures in the direction of > "resource modelling". This is *not* an official RESTafarian answer, just my opinion: * A resource model is an ontology. For business, I use the REA (Resource-Event-Agent) business ontology as embedded in UNCEFACT's Modeling Methodology (UMM). The Order-Fulfillment-Settlement cycle is pretty well cooked, should be published officially in a month or two. * UNECE Recommended EC Agreement works for me as interaction semantics. RESTful implementations have been kicked around on the rest-discuss Yahoo group, but I haven't seen a full running example yet. > I think that's a bit of a shame, because there are some interesting > ideas lurking in REST and it's idioms which it might be possible to > work up into something expressive enough to do some very interesting > things with ... if my characterization of REST earlier is right, then > there are surprising (to me at least) echoes of Milners Pi-calculus > (eg. think of RESTs POST-a-URI and URI-in-a-Response idioms as > analogous to mobility in Pi[1]). I'm coming from a similar place. I see a bunch of interesting ideas and will continue to explore them until I either hit a dead end or get something useful up and running in a real business situation. Just giving every significant object a URI has lots of benefits, including getting rid of a bunch of dispatchers and "correlation" code.
Received on Wednesday, 1 January 2003 15:41:31 UTC