- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 16:34:49 +0100
- To: "Sergey Beryozkin" <sberyozkin@zandar.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
- Cc: "Paul Watson" <Paul.Watson@newcastle.ac.uk>, "Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>, "Thomas Rischbeck" <thomas.rischbeck@arjuna.com>, <arnaud.simon@arjuna.com>
Sergey, > > It seems to me that the state which you characterized as "3. State as in > "data resource"" is a more general case of either 1. Service state or 2. > Application state > > For example if we have a huge file which needs to be exposed, then if it > doesn't matter which customer gets some data from this file (identified by > some token), then it looks like that this file is really part of the > 1.Service state > However, if a service wants to present to different clients the different > views of the same data extracted from the file, then it becomes > 2.Application/activity state I disagree. In the first case, the "service state" is private to the service. Nobody knows and nobody should care what data the service maintains behind its interface. In the second case, the "application state" captures interaction, application specific information. In the third case, a resource is exposed through a URI so that it can be identified and refer to. True, a service may decide to expose part or the entire resource through its interface, in which case we don't really care what's behind that interface. Regards, .savas.
Received on Tuesday, 24 June 2003 11:35:03 UTC