• To: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Subject: Re: many-to-many
• From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>
• Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:34:53 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3E305926.5060904@d...>; from rsalz@d... on Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 04:05:42PM -0500
• References: <r01050400-1023-6332F44C2F1511D78F1A0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]> <3E305926.5060904@d...>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 04:05:42PM -0500, Rich Salz wrote:
> >If we dispose of the inconvenient fiction 
> >of a "Resource", most of the metaphysical hooey 
> >surrounding URIs goes away.
> 
> I'd like to watch you try, if only so I could watch the heads of 
> Fielding and the rest of the REST camp explode.

Oh please.  I doubt it would come as a surprise to anybody in the
"REST camp", including Roy, to learn that a resource was an
abstraction (though I only realized this relatively recently,
because I hadn't thought much about it);

 "More precisely, a resource R is a temporally varying membership
  function MR(t), which for time t maps to a set of entities, or
  values, which are equivalent."
   -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2000Sep/0030

Also, see an Alloy model that some folks put together on the RESTwiki
that emphasizes that fact;

http://internet.conveyor.com/RESTwiki/moin.cgi/WebState

MB
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: many-to-many
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: many-to-many
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: many-to-many
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: many-to-many
• Next by Date: Re: many-to-many
• Previous by thread: Re: many-to-many
• Next by thread: Re: many-to-many
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread