- From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 09:47:19 +0100
- To: <hugo@w3.org>, <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Hugo wrote: > I remember, during the discussions around @safe, some people > arguing that an operation could be safe while not having the > semantics of GET. i argued that way, and still believe that operation safety is orthogonal to the 'method' employed. i also still see safety as an abstract concept and not tied to just HTTP e.g. getStockQuote could be bound to a message queue and safety would indicate if the binding could use a non-destructive read. conversely it allows the indication of a getStockQuote using SOAP over HTTP POST to be also marked as being "safe". so i disagree with DaveO when he says adding @method="GET" to the interface means we can do away with @safe. Paul
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2004 04:47:28 UTC