- From: Mike Dierken <mike@dataconcert.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 10:26:37 -0700
- To: "'xml-dist-app@w3.org'" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Amelia A Lewis'" <alewis@tibco.com>, Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Amelia A Lewis [mailto:alewis@tibco.com] > > Incidentally, URIs also typically suggest a strongly > client-server model, a pull model, and synchronous > interactions. All of those may be good reasons to speculate > on how to extend URIs, or what good addressing semantics are > for asynchronous, or push, or strongly peer-to-peer models. > I disagree about URIs implying a pull model and synchronous interactions. The mailto:mike@dataconcert.com URI isn't pull and it isn't synchronous. Any http based URI support PUT and POST - which are messages pushed to the server. The site http://www.topiczero.com/ shows an http/javascript client that receives messages asynchronously pushed by a server (when it works...). The somewhat popular Gnutella network - built in part by Gene Kan who unfortunately passed away recently - uses URIs and HTTP to do its thing. So, URI are identifiers, how you interact with what they identify - topics, queues, mailboxes, people, cars, songs, etc. - is a separate issue. Mike "The Web works both ways" Dierken
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2002 13:27:28 UTC