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

Re: REST as RPC done right

  • To: xml-dev@l...
  • Subject: Re: REST as RPC done right
  • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 14:24:39 -0500
  • References: <2A1A9A440F30854CB487D269D76077C5154368@E...>

rest domain specific atom
Stephen Anderson wrote:
> I believe you are incorrectly characterising what HTTP's 
> request-methods are; IMO, the URI is the method, the 
> request-methods are just different ways of invoking them. Or 
> to put it another way, the request-methods don't do the 
> work, whatever is represented by the URI does, which 
> makes the URI directly analogous to an RPC method 
> (though I guess in the case of SOAP et al they're 
> better characterised as "objects").

So if I do a "GET" of a stock quote and a "PUT" or "POST" of a stock
quote, that's really all the same thing? I disagree. HTTP's request
methods are methods. They are highly generic methods but methods
> > I think RPC on top of HTTP is bad, purely because HTTP is an
> > application. RPC
> > goes beneath it. This is how things should be.
> I have to disagree here. You've already said yourself that 
> HTTP is implictly an RPC protocol: why wrap one RPC protocol 
> in another?

He said you shouldn't. Because the level beneath HTTP is implicitly
already RPC so putting another RPC layer on top makes no sense. Are you
guys in violent agreement?

> I think people are tying themselves into semantic knots here; 
> surely RPC protocols are just a subset of resource-request 
> protocols, more domain-specific. 

The only concept XML-RPC or SOAP RPC has is "send message and get
result." I don't see how that is "more domain specific." You can of
course build domain specific protocols *on top of* RPC protocols. I'm
not familiar with the term "resource-request protocol". I'd use the term
"application protocol."

> Any generalised resource-request protocol like HTTP can be used as 
> an RPC protocol; though of course it does not follow that you 
> _should_ use it :) Then again, sometimes interoperability is 
> worth inefficiency...

You can layer any protocol on any protocol. IP on pigeons!

 Paul Prescod


Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
First Name
Last Name
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.

Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.