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

Re: REST has too many verbs

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: REST has too many verbs
• From: Simon Fell <xml@z...>
• Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:11:46 -0800
• In-reply-to: <E16alhM-0000u5-00@s...>
• References: <3C68E697.C5B17230@p...> <1013532775.9739.252.camel@l...> <20020212173113.GA6083@t...> <E16alhM-0000u5-00@s...>

On Tue, 12 Feb 2002 17:26:30 -0500, in xml you wrote:

>On Tuesday 12 February 2002 12:31 pm, Amy Lewis wrote:
>> >I like the notion of a spectrum of possibilities.  BEEP certainly
>> > seems capable of supporting very complex modes of communication. 
>> > HTTP can be useful for request-response.  I'd like something
>> > that's just 'send' (aka XMLChucker) to fill out the bottom.
>>
>> DIME?  Currently an internet draft, but some impls exist.
>
>This occurred to me too... I didn't like DIME at first blush, but DIME 
>on a socket  (DOS) might be close to what Simon was talking about.

IIRC, There's bindings for DIME to TCP & UDP defined in the WS-Routing
spec. And to clarify one of Simon's earlier points, its valid to have
a DIME message that's only a single record long.

Cheers
Simon
www.pocketsoap.com

• References:
  • Re: REST has too many verbs
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: REST has too many verbs
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: REST has too many verbs
    • From: amyzing@t... (Amy Lewis )
  • Re: REST has too many verbs
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
• Next by Date: Re: Principle of Sustainable Complexity
• Previous by thread: Re: REST has too many verbs
• Next by thread: Re: REST has too many verbs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread