Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
And keeping it loosely coupled means not needing to know much more than that to start the conversation. That's email. It is discovery-based. But a conversation is not a protocol. A protocol (by any of the definitions I've seen), sets expectations precisely. It seems to me that the UDDI methods are there precisely because the gestures/speech acts are "relevance feedback control" and the designers specifically want the 'advantages' of that architecture over 'downloadable feature engines' or a 'single proxy'. BTW: if the WSIO gets traction, and uses UDDI as announced, what do you think based on your work with REST, the results will be? len -----Original Message----- From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul@p...] Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote: > > I think it's questionable whether the unification has more to do with > GET than with URI's themselves. FWIW. Be careful. URIs aren't innovative either. They are just email addresses. "REST therefore gains the separation of concerns of the client-server style without the server scalability problem, allows information hiding through a generic interface to enable encapsulation and evolution of services, and provides for a diverse set of functionality through downloadable feature-engines." "This constraint sacrifices some of the advantages of other architectures, such as the stateful interaction of a relevance feedback protocol like WAIS, in order to retain the advantages of a single, generic interface for connector semantics. In return, the generic interface makes it possible to access a multitude of services through a single proxy."
|
