Re: Proposed Venn Diagrams

Yes, nice diagram.  +1.

Re "XML Interface Services":

It's a point of confusion, alright.  Does "XML Interface Services"
mean the runtime interface is XML content (i.e., XML-encoded
representations), or does it mean the external, design-time description
of the interface is XML (i.e., WSDL)?  Could the footnote address
this?

Mark, are interfaces "declared with HTTP" actually declared
anywhere?

--Walden

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
To: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: Proposed Venn Diagrams


>
> Very nice, Mike.  I think many people will find these useful.
>
> Two comments ...
>
> On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 12:19:52AM -0400, Champion, Mike wrote:
> > "Uniform Interface Services" aka REST is a
> > subset of the Web.
>
> True, but I think B is much too large relative to C.  The vast majority
> of the Web uses uniform interface semantics.
>
> > discussed] is roughly set "F". (It might be called "XML Interface
Services",
> > but let's not go there now).  That overlaps the REST circle because one
can
> > (e.g. using SOAP 1.2's GET feature) build RESTful web services;
>
> Right, but then the interface is no longer declared with XML (gasp! 8-),
> it's declared with HTTP, so "XML Interface Services" isn't an accurate
> description of what's going on.  Perhaps that's not such a big deal, but
> it could be a point of confusion.  Maybe a footnote would help.
>
> MB
> --
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
> Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
>
>

Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 11:06:34 UTC