Re: Another try at HTTP binding

Hi Jacek,

On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:37:56PM +0100, Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 06:49, Mark Baker wrote:
> > > 1) Is it good practice to extract part of your content to parameterize
> > > your URI?
> > IMO, no.
> > >  If not, what is the best way?
> > Invoke GET on the URI to retrieve a document, and include in that
> > a declaration of how the URI can be parameterized.  This is what forms
> > are for (well, "GET forms" anyhow); see XForms[1] or RDF Forms[2].
> Mark, I see WSDL as very similar to a form language.

Somewhat, I'd say; close enough to bare a resemblance, but different
enough to not be substitutable. 8-)

>  A form describes an
> interface to a human user,

An HTML form would, yes.  But, for example, I designed RDF Forms to be
usable by automata, not humans.

> a WSDL describes an interface to a developer
> or to a system.


I suppose that the difference here is that a typical use of a form
describes a resource to which a particular data format can be submitted,
while a typical use of a WSDL document describes a data format *and*
an interface.  In other words, a form assumes a constrained interface.

> If a set of resources identified by a parametrizable URI is a web
> service, it should be describable using WSDL.

If I'm interpreting that correctly, yes!

Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.

Received on Monday, 19 January 2004 10:29:07 UTC