RE: Roy's ApacheCon presentation

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 3:46 PM
> To: Mark Baker; Champion, Mike
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Roy's ApacheCon presentation
> 
>
> But from my perspective, most "real" Web 
> services ... will require SOAP headers for security, 
> management, reliability, message coordination, etc. The REST approach 
> can't address these requirements.

Before Mark says a lot of stuff I don't agree with about reliability and
message coordination :-) let me jump in to defend REST in this context:  One
COULD use GET/PUT to transfer SOAP messages with the security, etc. headers;
they would not HAVE to be POSTed.  I can imagine this being done in a
RESTfully correct way (although there is some point of doctrine about PUT
not allowing any processing such as a SOAP-compliant system would do).  One
could even hope that WSDL 1.2 will support a definition of all this,
although I don't know if that is  realistic.

This leads us back into a familiar tar pit: at the F2F, a number of people
(with the vociferous exception of one prominent person!) expressed the
belief that we really have to define once and for all what a 'web service'
is... or at least define what this "thingies" are that we are defining the
architecture of :-)