RE: WSA Properties (was RE: WSA constraints)

Mark,

Can you explain what you mean by "visibility"?

Anne

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On
> Behalf Of Champion, Mike
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 12:03 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: WSA Properties (was RE: WSA constraints)
>
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mark Baker [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:57 AM
> > To: Champion, Mike
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: WSA Properties (was RE: WSA constraints)
> >
> >
> > I think all those you list are useful properties, but I'd be
> > happy just
> > to focus on visibility, because I feel it's a required property, and
> > that Web services don't have it.
> >
> >
> >
> > I wouldn't call the ability to create custom protocols a desirable
> > property, because it sacrifices interoperability.
>
> I'm hoping we can avoid the normative judgments for now ... the
> point of the
> exercise IMHO is to *describe* the extremes of a "pure" SOAP/WSDL
> architecture on one hand and a pure REST architecture on the other hand.
> Some of the properties will be the same for both, some will differ.
> "Visibility" (although I'm not happy with the label) is certainly one on
> which they differ. We can start with that, but I'd like to get a somewhat
> larger list on the table.   For example, "Performance" was implicitly
> mentioned in the discussion of the quote from Fielding that Chris
> dug up the
> other day ...
>
> >
> > Sorry for being dense.  I'm sure it was clearer on the call. 8-)
>
> Uhh, no.  We know this is a rathole, and we are as confused as anyone. :-)
>