Re: Summing up on visibility(?)
Mark Baker <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ok, I *really* don't want to open this up again full-blown, but I just have to ask ... On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 07:15:01PM +0000, Miles Sabin wrote: > Well, I don't believe that application-level semantics are likely to be > accessible to anything, intermediary or otherwise, without it having > some sort of prior knowledge of those semantics (this is just the good > ol' end-to-end principle). Wouldn't the prior knowledge of HTTP application semantics by an HTTP intermediary qualify? I would agree that, for example, an SMTP message isn't visible to an HTTP intermediary. But there's shared knowledge on application semantics in the HTTP/HTTP case. I'm not trying to conclude the previous thread. Just hoping that we can find agreement on *some* degree of loss in visibility with the method in the body. MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis