- From: Walden Mathews <waldenm@optonline.net>
- Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:52:22 -0500
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Miles Sabin <miles@milessabin.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Mark, > For example, assuming that a URI was tagged with "ibm-related-things", > then an app written to grab and analyze stuff related to IBM would > want to recognize that element and invoke GET on the URI. A wide > variety of forms of data could be returned for analysis, including > data that doesn't have anything to do with IBM; a runtime type > error (which should indicate that binding is still late). > In other words, "ibm-related-things" is a partial specification, leading to immediate partial understanding, which can be developed into full understanding by the coordinating applications if the ROI warrants that, and the ROI calculation can be performed at runtime, not design time, but actually at either time. Comments? So when the app does GET on the URI, it gets something it wasn't anticipating, and then has to make sense out of that. But not necessarily complete sense. It can weed out irrelevant content based on some heuristic. The remaining question is: when the app wants to do something other than snoop around, how is the understanding gained? How does that differ from the WSDL method? How "late" can WSDL be bound? Is there some limit where both approaches converge? Is the benefit of late binding to be expressed just in the tightness of feedback loops, or something else? How important is "partial specification" and "partial understanding" in all this? Thanks, Walden
Received on Monday, 6 January 2003 21:53:29 UTC