Re: Choreography and REST

Mark Baker <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 11:24:20PM -0400, David W. Levine wrote:
> On the face of it, this flies in the face of 40 years of programming 
> evolution.
> Reuse, factoring and composition are based on notions that we can reuse
> chunks of code that perform identical tasks, and that we should actively
> strive to separate unrelated issues. (e.g. message format/content and state
> of conversation.)

I don't see what that has to do with sending different messages.

> This issue become especially cogent in negotiation and flexible choreography
> situations. If two or more web services are engaging in a classic negotiation
> pattern where they iteratively revise their negotiation stances, I may 
> expect to
> see sequences where tens, or even hundreds of identical messages are exchanged,
> differing only in the increasingly long history that led the services to 
> their current
> interaction. Likewise, if a pair of services, at some point in relationship 
> decide they need
> to undertake to follow a mutually understood choreography, I'm somewhat at 
> a loss
> to see how to approach this.

Hmm, are you talking about stateful interactions perhaps?

> >Not really.  Anybody who's written any RDF code has already done this.
> 
> 
> I'll politely observe this is a gross simplification of a rather complex 
> problem.

The problem is indeed complex, but the mechanics of the solution that
RDF provides is pretty simple.

> However, there's a key missing step. A skipped precondition, if you
> will. Before you can conclude that the REST constraints will
> produce a desirable system, you need to determine whether the
> properties from which the REST constraints were derived fully
> match the properties of the system you need.

Granted.  Based on the use cases I've seen for Web services, REST is an
*excellent* fit for *all* of them.  But others should determine this
for themselves, sure.  But ...

> I'd suggest a complementary approach. When one finds that a
> problem seems to be bending the REST constraints, go back and
> try to understand which underlying property is causing the
> problem.

This sounds good, but it's extremely tough because it presupposes an
indepth knowledge of REST.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               [email protected]
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.