- From: Jim Webber <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 02:39:02 -0000
- To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Hey Mark: > A message is not an application abstraction, it's the means > by which an abstraction is utilized. Using the canonical > stock quote example, the stock is the abstraction (the thing > with the interface), and the messages manipulate that > abstraction using that interface. No, no, no. It is up to me what my abstractions are, and at the WSA level I choose "message" (hey, this is like Pokemon!). That message might convey stuff which is resolved by the application into something more specific (e.g. a stock quote), but that is not important at this level. Maybe I can put it in REST-like terms (in fact Savas and I have just been discussing this very topic): a Web Service has two operations - SEND and RECEIVE, which involve the use of an abstraction that I call a "SOAP message." This is like your generic REST interfaces, except this interface is independent even of URI scheme and doesn't care what transfer protocol you use. All you care about is that messages are sent and received, therefore mesasge is a valid abstraction. It might not be valid from your perspective, but then it strikes me that not much that I work in generally is :-) Jim
Received on Sunday, 8 February 2004 21:41:59 UTC