- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 21:19:18 -0400
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 05:21:06PM -0400, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: > > Developers who use WSDL are used to the operation > > defining the contract. If you say "operation=state, verb=GET", and the > > effective operation is GET and not "state", then I expect that will be > > very confusing to them. > > Why should it be? They map their Bulbs.state(bulbId) to an HTTP GET > operation. It's better than naming their method Bulbs.GET(bulbId). Sorry, I should have been clearer. By "them" I meant the service user, not the publisher. For the RESTful case, the service user has no need to understand what "state" means, and so IMO, they shouldn't even see it. > The > issue will be to provide an easy way to do this mapping at the > programming language level but more and more language are now providing > annotation systems. Adding type='application' is certainly going to add > confusion since that having two ways to do the same thing is always > confusing. But it's not the same thing, is it? 'type="transport" would make the effective operation "state", and 'type="application"' would make it "GET". > Unless the user is well-informed on the meaning of the HTTP > verbs, he will end up misusing them; and the easier is it for non-Web > aware users to develop Web applications, the more likely it will that > they will misuse it. I expect that most users will continue to use "type='transport'" (which should be the default for that reason). "type='application'" is just meant for publishers of RESTful services. MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis Actively seeking contract work or employment
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2003 21:15:58 UTC