W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > May 2003

Re: /service/@targetResource ?

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 12:54:28 -0400
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-ID: <20030514125428.A4507@www.markbaker.ca>

On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:10:47AM -0400, Arthur Ryman wrote:
> In the discussion with the architecture group today, there seemed to be 
> confusion between a service and the resource is acts on. The architecture 
> group defines a Web service to have something that has a URI, but that URI 
> is not the same as the resource that the Web service acts on.

That's not true.  A resource is anything with identity.  Web services
have identity, so are therefore resources.  They may effect other
resources, but that seems inconsequential.

It is certainly the case that many Web services today, despite being
resources, don't behave like them (i.e. they don't answer HTTP GET
requests, as one example).  But this need not be the case, since every
Web service *could* answer a GET and serialize their current state into
the response.

So I'd caution that it shouldn't be assumed that a Web service is a
Facade behind which resources live, which this seems to do.

I don't understand the problem that @resource attempts to solve.  Surely
not all resources that a service effects needs to be listed in the
WSDL?!  Not only could the list be huge, it's not part of the interface,
because it may vary depending upon the input message.


Oh, and in the banking example, a bank account is more likely to be
the resource that's modified, rather than "the bank".  But if, for
example, a tranfer was initiated via a service, then both accounts
would be effected resources.

Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
  Actively seeking contract work or employment
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2003 12:52:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:29 UTC