[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)

• To: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>
• Subject: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>
• Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 18:50:23 +0000
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200202121841.NAA23539@m...>
• References: <200202121841.NAA23539@m...>

On Tuesday 12 February 2002 18:41, you wrote:
> > > Thought why he wouldn't want it to identify himself, rather than an
> > > HTML page is a different question.  Certainly just *because* the GET
> > > returns an HTML when you ask it for that (all browsers ask for
> > > text/html), doesn't mean that the URI identifies the HTML.  HTML is one
> > > *representation* of the resource, not necessarily the resource itself.
> >
> > But therein lies the problem. It could spurt out a nice HTML page about
> > me with pictures and everything, but all that static data can do is
> > describe me.
>
> What else would you expect of a digital representation?

I'm not a string of bits and can't be represented as such, but many 
interfaces to me can be approximated by exchanging strings of bits. Instead 
of a GET producing some human-readable document about me, I want a whole list 
of operations to be made available - one of which may be the chance to read 
my egotistical self-description, but that is in no way special, and is indeed 
the least useful one there!

> > The static data could contain my phone number allowing me to be rung, but
> > then that's escaping the Web model.
>
> No, that's exactly the Web model, especially if the link to your phone
> number were typed;
>
> <a href="urn:oid:1.2.826.0.1.4072548.2.0"
>    rel="http://phone.org/phonenum">
> Call me</a>

But how can software resolve that?

It'd have more luck with a resolvable URI for my phone, such as 
phone:+447974437842 - not sure if that syntax is exactly correct, RFC.net is 
being slow right now, but there is a URI schema for telephone numbers.

> You could, if you wanted;
>
> telnet alaric-snell.com 80
>
> GET urn:oid:1.2.826.0.1.4072548.2.0 HTTP/1.1
>
> response;
>
> HTTP/1.1 305 Use Proxy
> Location: http://some-mobile-phone-provider.com
>
> But sure, it's always easiest to use an HTTP scheme URI because you
> don't have to worry about this boostrapping problem.  For example,
> there is no reason why your phone couldn't be identified by;
>
> http://some-mobile-phone-provider.com/subscriber/1.2.826.0.1.4072548.2.0

But then I'm dependent on some-mobile-phone-provider.com (a centralised 
resource) for the resolveability of my mobile phone.

I prefer phone: URLs for this... HTTP isn't a useful protocol for talking to 
a mobile phone; it's even a bit heavyweight for sending an SMS (which has 
very UDP semantics :-)

>
> MB
>

ABS

-- 
                               Alaric B. Snell
 http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  http://www.warhead.org.uk/
   Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software  

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• Next by Date: RE: Principle of Sustainable Complexity
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• Next by thread: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread