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

Re: Generality of HTTP

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Generality of HTTP
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:19:25 -0800
• References: <69B15B675E99D411A4110008C786DA23020CC935@e...>

Miles Sabin wrote:
> 
>...
> 
> Not quite. Suppose the response endpoint is disconnected when the
> responder attempts to call back. Yes, the responder can retry later,
> or maybe consult some registry or other for an alternative target
> URI.

How does any of this violate or otherwise work against HTTP principles?

> But look what we're doing here: we're layering another protocol on top
> of HTTP, a protocol which doesn't match HTTPs semantics very well. 

Doesn't match how? What are HTTP's semantics? I'm starting to understand
them (years after I first worked with HTTP) and the more I do, the more
general they seem.

Is retry really even a protocol issue or just a software issue? Does
SMTP have a better solution?

> ... I'm
> not saying it _can't_ be done with HTTP, just that there are better
> ways of going about it.

Better how? Concretely.

 Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Generality of HTTP
    • From: "Miles Sabin" <msabin@i...>

• References:
  • RE: Generality of HTTP
    • From: "Miles Sabin" <msabin@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Generality of HTTP
• Next by Date: Re: Generality of HTTP
• Previous by thread: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Next by thread: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread