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

Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 13:31:42 -0800
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E4306FEE857@HQ5>

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" wrote:
> 
>...
> 
> Is this just an argument over GUIDs vs URIs?

That's part of it. But just part.

>...
> 
> >Linking and addressing is the best tool for managing the complexity of
> >the system. You're an old hypertext guy. This should come as second
> >nature to you.
> 
> "God have mercy on the man that doubts what he's sure of."
> 
> It does and I am old.  Old enough to have recognized that a link and
> a function call aren't that different at the end of the day.  

They are very different in that you are promised that following a link
will not trigger the Crash of the Server or any other bad thing. Or at
least if it does it is not your fault as the caller. It's a poor
implementation of the server. Whereas if you call a 0-argument function
you get what you get. It's your fault if you don't know that following
that link would have nasty effects.

If Google the company treated links as generic functions then they
wouldn't be able to traverse the Web and Google the service wouldn't
exist. I want the Web Services world to have equivalents of Google the
service which is why I want them to be linked together in a single
address space using hyperlinks, not functions.

 Paul Prescod

• References:
  • RE: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• Next by Date: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• Previous by thread: RE: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• Next by thread: Service discovery
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread