- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 15:48:07 -0400
- To: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
- Cc: "Damodaran, Suresh" <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org, w3c-wsa-editors@w3.org
FWIW, I *really* like how Mike has described the RESTful Web as a "subset" of the Web, because it is *exactly* that. I fully agree with him below too. Also, the "architectural style of the WWW" has not been written down yet, AFAIK, though I may have said a few things about my position on that on this list. REST is Roy's view of what constraints make the best Web apps, and I agree with him on that. But non-RESTful things are part of the Web too, such as cookies. On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 08:53:12AM -0600, Champion, Mike wrote: > > 1. Historically, REST style *is* more or less the > > architectural style of the WWW > > (whether we like it or not!). Not saying it as such would be rewriting > > history. > > So what are you suggesting ... to eliminate the distinction betweeen > "the Web" and "REST". I could live with that, I think, but I don't > feel comfortable implying that all the non-RESTful stuff > (CGI scripts, cookies, and statefulness maintained by > application servers) is not "the Web." <grin> > > I think I know where you're going -- maybe I cut TOO sharp a > distinction between the Web and the RESTful subset of the > Web -- but would appreciate specific wording suggestions from > Suresh or anyone who agrees with him. MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 15:46:02 UTC