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

Re: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???

• To: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>,xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>
• Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 11:20:31 +0000
• In-reply-to: <3C7DADFF.3D1369FA@p...>
• References: <NCBBKFMJCLIMOBIGKFMJOEANHEAA.ldodds@i...> <E16g2J3-0005yn-00@c...> <3C7DADFF.3D1369FA@p...>

On Thursday 28 February 2002 04:11, Paul Prescod wrote:
> Alaric Snell wrote:
> >...
> >
> > I would be inclined to agree with Simon here... CORBA's IIOP, RMI, and
> > good 'ole ONC RPC can all be described as 'requests directed to resources
> > using a generic interface with standard semantics that can be interpreted
> > by intermediaries almost as well as by the machines that originate
> > services" :-)
>
> If the interface to HTTP is basically
>
> class Resource{
>   Representation GET()
>   void PUT(Representation)
>   Representation POST(Representation)
>   void DELETE()
> }
>
> Then what is the equivalent for IIOP, RMI, etc?

For IIOP, it's documented in the specs... let me see... 
http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?formal/01-12-45

Basically, it's something like:

interface Object {
	Object invoke (String methodName, Object[] arguments);

	...and something that lists the implemented interfaces?
}

It doesn't have a flag saying whether the result is cacheable, from memory, 
so there's no difference between GET and POST. Never mind.

And as for PUT and DELETE - if the list of implemented interfaces includes 
the CORBA lifecycle stuff, then you get DELETE, and IIRC there's some storage 
management thing that not only gives you PUT put also gives you a GET that 
explicitly gets the object itself (if you're allowed to) that can be PUT back 
to reset it's state rather than just some arbitrary HTML representing it.

>
>  Paul Prescod
>

ABS

-- 
                               Alaric B. Snell
 http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  http://www.warhead.org.uk/
   Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software  

• References:
  • RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
    • From: "Leigh Dodds" <ldodds@i...>
  • Re: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
    • From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>
  • Re: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: RE: HTTPEctomy considered bad (was RE: RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???)
• Next by Date: Re: Question about the sytax of namespace declarations
• Previous by thread: RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• Next by thread: Re: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread