- From: Miles Sabin <miles@milessabin.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 11:06:53 +0000
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Francis McCabe wrote, > However, in the spirit of trying to help I would like to draw a > comparison between what I understand of this debate is and a similar > debate going on in a different arena. <snip/> That's helpful, thanks. > 3. you also have a standard way of encoding the `propositional > content'. I.e., an analogue of HTML but for Web services. I.e., such > a content language would allow Web service providers to express their > specific semantics in a common notation that all Web service clients > would be expected to `understand' in a hard-wired kind of a way. > > This is not the same as XML, SOAP or even WSDL, but something more > powerful. Because, in a truly RESTful way you would have to be able > to communicate actions as well as data. Agreed ... tho' I'd want to take "propositional content" as illustrative rather than mandatory: logic programming would definitely be an option, but it's only one of many. > Unfortunately it doesn't look like anyone is seriously pursuing such > an idea. At the same level of generality as FIPA ACL (or REST for that matter)? No, I think not, at least not very directly or very visibly. Cheers, Miles
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2003 06:07:25 UTC