[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Generality of HTTP
Miles Sabin wrote: > > Paul Prescod wrote, > > Miles Sabin wrote: > > > HTTP just wasn't designed for that kind of communication model. > > > > HTTP is perfectly acceptable for that kind of transaction. Hint: the > > "client" needs to be running a micro-HTTP server. > > How does that help with disconnected operation (ie. the client might > be offline when the response comes back)? You need either retry or a forwarding intermediary, just as with any other protocol. The question is merely whether the intermediary should "speak" the same protocol as the rest of the Web, using the same naming system (URIs), or should have its own naming system (e.g. email addresses or Jabber IDs) and its own protocol. By the way, if you are concerned about developing conventions for using HTTP in manners it has not been used, then how do you feel about SOAP-over-HTTP wherein people knowingly and consciously do things that violate the SOAP model such as using POST for idempotent queries and "success" result codes for failures? Paul Prescod
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|