RE: Roy's ApacheCon presentation

"Anne Thomas Manes" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch
Message-ID <[email protected]>
But people want a little more power over their interfaces than just
GET/POST/PUT/DELETE. They like to be able to use POST to tell a resource a
little more information about how some posted information should be
processed. After all, a resource might be able to do multiple things.

Anne

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On
> Behalf Of Mark Baker
> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 12:08 PM
> To: Champion, Mike
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Roy's ApacheCon presentation
>
>
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 08:23:33AM -0700, Champion, Mike wrote:
> > > If you don't buy that argument, would you agree that having less
> > > interfaces means easier integration?  i.e. that it's easier if all the
> > > insurance companies agree on a standard interface than it would be if
> > > they didn't?
> >
> > I don't see any evidence that this is true.  CORBA, HTTP,  etc.
> > deal with the protocols for shipping data around; IDL and WSDL
> > deal with interface definitions, XML deals with the data format
> > and encoding issues.
>
> That's not true.  HTTP defines the interface, the same way IDL or
> WSDL does.  Transport protocols, like TCP, do the "shipping data
> around" for HTTP.
>
> > > If so, would you also agree that if banking and CRM
> > > companies could agree to wrap themselves in the same interface, that
> > > this would further reduce integration costs?  And if yes to that, then
> > > wouldn't the ultimate interface be one that could wrap all systems?
> >
> > I'm afraid we have to get into the S-word ("semantics" ... shudder).
> > CORBA assumes that someone has mapped the meaning of of the interaction
> > onto methods and arguments, REST assumes that the meaning of
> the interaction
> > is encoded as a "document".
>
> No, REST assumes that the meaning of the interaction has been mapped to
> methods and arguments as well.  Just the same methods and arguments as
> everybody else (uniform).
>
> If we want an apples-to-apples, no red herrings comparison here, we can
> ignore data semantics, because both styles have exactly the same problem
> to overcome in this regard; once you've got data, how do you process it?
>
> MB
> --
> Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.   http://www.markbaker.ca
>
>    Will distribute objects for food
>
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.