[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Generality of HTTP
Mark Baker wrote, > Miles Sabin wrote, > > HTTP just wasn't designed for that kind of communication model. > > You'd be surprised. I wouldn't. But it's one thing to say that HTTP, along with lots of supporting infrastructure, can do all sorts of interesting stuff, quite another to say that HTTP was designed for them or that it's optimal or even adequate. > The architectural style used to craft HTTP is certainly capable of a > lot more than what HTTP can currently do. So you'd need extensions > for some things Then it's not HTTP any more. > (though not, I believe, for the example you describe above). Disconnected operation (whether deliberate or accidental) and endpoint mobility are the tricky cases. It can be done, but it's not pretty. Other protocols (or hybrids, HTTP+SMTP to name only the most obvious example) do a better job. > Consider what might be possible with vanilla HTTP 1.1 and; > - a web server near the user (such as in the browser, ala KnowNow) > - intermediaries adding value with queueing, caching, filtering, > routing, etc.. All sorts of things certainly. But I don't see how you get from there to any kind of interesting or useful generality claim for HTTP. HTTP can be layered on top of SMTP, and IP can be layered on top of fleets of carrier pigeons: does that mean that SMTP is more fundamental than HTTP or pigeons more fundamental that IP? Cheers, Miles -- Miles Sabin InterX Internet Systems Architect 27 Great West Road +44 (0)20 8817 4030 Middx, TW8 9AS, UK msabin@i... http://www.interx.com/
|
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
|