- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:48:58 -0500
- To: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Hi Sanjiva, On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 04:13:52PM +0600, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > Hi Mark, > > I like the RESTified version - simple. Cool! > >From a WSDL point of view, that's just a binding. So whatever > the abstract syntax we agree on, we could define a RESTified > HTTP binding using the MONITOR method as you did quite easily. How so? How could you define a binding to an application method like MONITOR? I thought bindings were supposed to be protocol independant. Actually, it wasn't my intention to get into this here and now, but I disagree that it's a binding. > The discussion we're having now is above binding details - its > more about how to tell someone that a service has something > it can notify others about (i.e., an event it can generate). FWIW, we use OPTIONS for this. If you invoke the OPTIONS method on a URI and the Allow response header includes "MONITOR" then you know you can monitor that resource for event notifications. Side bar; hmm, I wonder if OPTIONS wouldn't be a better method to return WSDL than GET? > Everything in your example fits nicely under the approach I > proposed - you have a notification service reference (the > reply to header) plus subscription data which seems to indicate > what info the subscriber is interested in. Right. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Friday, 1 November 2002 10:46:32 UTC