1166Re: [rest-discuss] Re: GoogleAPI is Rest?
- May 1, 2002Lucas Gonze wrote:
>WSDL for HTTP is -- as far as I can tell -- exactly as functional as
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Asynch Messaging wrote:
> > > And to provide sufficient metadata, in the form of WSDL, so that a large
> > > number of developers can be instantly up and running.
> > Don't know how to do that in pure HTTP - that's a missing piece. Not enough
> > to through out the baby with the bathwater though.
> There are a bunch of missing pieces. WSDL for HTTP resources needs to
> happen. Work on event models needs to get finished. Maybe store and
> forward (the email workalike we discussed here a few months ago) needs to
WSDL for SOAP. That doesn't mean that WSDL is REST-ful, but it does mean
that your next sentence is misleading:
> SOAP-RPC already offers solutions to all of the above.How does SOAP-RPC handle "event models"????
> ... They're not asWe are already more filled out. WSDL is broken for HTTP but just as
> good as HTTP solutions could be but at least they're out there. Until the
> REST stack gets filled out to the same degree as the XML RPC stack, we are
> in ivory tower land.
broken for SOAP. UDDI is entirely useless for both. Our rough ideas at
event models are better than what I've seen for SOAP. We have *some*
form of authentication. Most important: we have an addressing and
resource manipulation model. They don't even know that they lack one yet
(despite that I've been telling them for six months!).
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>