- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 08:47:52 -0400
- To: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
- Cc: "'xml-dist-app@w3.org'" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 11:13:27AM +0100, Marc Hadley wrote: > Just to try to bring this back around to Stuart's (and my) original > problem with the current formulation. I don't think either of us > disagrees (Stuart, please jump in here if you do) that GET is an > application semantic, but at the moment the GETness of the operation is > duplicated in two places: the MEP in use and the value of the web method > feature (which has an implicit MEP). As it stands the MEP and value of > the web method feature can disagree and the spec is silent on what > happens if they do. > > My suggestion of refactoring the existing formulation to use MEPs and a > 'safe' feature in place of the web method feature was intended to remove > the duplication from the two whilst preserving the ability of the HTTP > binding to accurately model and make use of the web architecture. Right, you said this earlier in this thread. My response was that there is no duplicate information; a MEP describes how messages are exchanged, independant from the meaning of those messages. Perhaps we can talk about that on this week's call. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Monday, 8 July 2002 08:36:47 UTC