83 messages in org.w3.www-tagRe: FW: draft findings on Unsafe Meth...
FromSent OnAttachments
Dan ConnollyApr 15, 2002 8:50 am 
Larry MasinterApr 15, 2002 1:44 pm 
David OrchardApr 15, 2002 3:01 pm 
David OrchardApr 15, 2002 3:19 pm 
Mark BakerApr 15, 2002 8:00 pm 
Keith MooreApr 15, 2002 8:37 pm 
Scott CantorApr 15, 2002 9:28 pm 
Edwin KhodabakchianApr 15, 2002 9:34 pm 
David OrchardApr 15, 2002 10:18 pm 
Paul PrescodApr 15, 2002 11:17 pm 
Tim BrayApr 15, 2002 11:32 pm 
Mark NottinghamApr 16, 2002 1:01 am 
Tim BrayApr 16, 2002 1:02 am 
Mark NottinghamApr 16, 2002 1:09 am 
Paul PrescodApr 16, 2002 2:11 am 
Paul PrescodApr 16, 2002 3:02 am 
Mark BakerApr 16, 2002 4:54 am 
Williams, StuartApr 16, 2002 8:22 am 
Keith MooreApr 16, 2002 8:32 am 
jon...@research.att.comApr 16, 2002 8:44 am 
Scott CantorApr 16, 2002 8:55 am 
Paul PrescodApr 16, 2002 9:40 am 
Mark NottinghamApr 16, 2002 9:42 am 
Hutchison, NigelApr 16, 2002 9:43 am 
Henrik Frystyk NielsenApr 16, 2002 10:48 am 
Bullard, Claude L (Len)Apr 16, 2002 1:46 pm 
Larry MasinterApr 16, 2002 6:39 pm 
Roy T. FieldingApr 16, 2002 7:54 pm 
Larry MasinterApr 16, 2002 10:10 pm 
Graham KlyneApr 17, 2002 1:54 am 
Paul PrescodApr 18, 2002 12:33 am 
Graham KlyneApr 18, 2002 9:11 am 
Alex RousskovApr 18, 2002 9:30 am 
Paul PrescodApr 18, 2002 9:45 am 
Graham KlyneApr 18, 2002 11:58 am 
Roy T. FieldingApr 18, 2002 3:11 pm 
Don BoxApr 18, 2002 6:28 pm 
Mark BakerApr 18, 2002 8:50 pm 
Keith MooreApr 18, 2002 8:54 pm 
Paul PrescodApr 18, 2002 10:00 pm 
Graham KlyneApr 19, 2002 12:53 am 
Bill de hÓraApr 19, 2002 4:18 am 
Roy T. FieldingApr 19, 2002 1:20 pm 
Anne Thomas ManesApr 22, 2002 3:23 pm 
Paul PrescodApr 22, 2002 4:01 pm 
Anne Thomas ManesApr 22, 2002 8:17 pm 
Paul PrescodApr 22, 2002 10:21 pm 
Anne Thomas ManesApr 23, 2002 5:36 am 
Paul PrescodApr 23, 2002 12:03 pm 
Paul PrescodApr 23, 2002 2:09 pm 
Roy T. FieldingApr 23, 2002 2:14 pm 
Bullard, Claude L (Len)Apr 23, 2002 2:50 pm 
Joshua AllenApr 23, 2002 2:53 pm 
David OrchardApr 23, 2002 4:14 pm 
Keith MooreApr 23, 2002 5:05 pm 
Roy T. FieldingApr 23, 2002 5:14 pm 
Simon St.LaurentApr 23, 2002 5:18 pm 
Larry MasinterApr 23, 2002 6:31 pm 
Mark BakerApr 23, 2002 6:36 pm 
Paul PrescodApr 23, 2002 8:03 pm 
Tim BrayApr 23, 2002 8:30 pm 
Dan ConnollyApr 23, 2002 9:05 pm 
Joshua AllenApr 23, 2002 9:10 pm 
Anne Thomas ManesApr 23, 2002 9:28 pm 
Mark NottinghamApr 23, 2002 9:42 pm 
Jeff BoneApr 23, 2002 9:42 pm 
Joshua AllenApr 23, 2002 10:02 pm 
Paul PrescodApr 23, 2002 10:05 pm 
Joshua AllenApr 23, 2002 10:27 pm 
Joshua AllenApr 23, 2002 10:38 pm 
Mark NottinghamApr 23, 2002 10:57 pm 
Mark NottinghamApr 23, 2002 11:16 pm 
Joshua AllenApr 23, 2002 11:20 pm 
Dan ConnollyApr 23, 2002 11:23 pm 
Tim BrayApr 23, 2002 11:56 pm 
Bullard, Claude L (Len)Apr 24, 2002 7:23 am 
Larry MasinterApr 24, 2002 8:47 am 
Keith MooreApr 24, 2002 10:46 am 
Bullard, Claude L (Len)Apr 24, 2002 10:56 am 
Aaron SwartzApr 24, 2002 11:27 am 
Mike DierkenApr 24, 2002 12:06 pm 
David OrchardApr 25, 2002 10:54 am 
Roy T. FieldingMay 5, 2002 3:38 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: FW: draft findings on Unsafe Methods (whenToUseGet-7)Actions...
From:Roy T. Fielding (fiel@apache.org)
Date:Apr 23, 2002 2:14:07 pm
List:org.w3.www-tag

Please review the charter of the XML Protocol working group. It explicitly says that the XML Protocol should be based on SOAP 1.1 This isn't a request to rubber stamp SOAP 1.1. We want and need to improve SOAP, but we don't want to make a complete change to its architecture. I'm also pointing out some basic realities. W3C is, at heart, an academic organization. And its perfectly reasonable for W3C to pursue its academic goals (REST and the Semantic Web). But if W3C wants to play a major role in business systems, and if W3C wants to continue receiving funding from the big software vendors, then the W3C TAG must be willing to accomodate the requirements of big business. If the REST faction continues to try to undermine the existing Web services architecture, it will alienate big business.

Hmmm, well, speaking as an academic and an open source developer AND a commercial software developer, I can say with authority that the W3C was created by big businesses specifically to prevent their own marketing departments from destroying the value inherent in the Web through their own, and their competitors', short-sighted, quarterly-revenue-driven pursuit of profits. It was not created by academics. Open source developers actively opposed the creation of a pay-to-play consortium. The only reason it is at MIT is because that's what was needed to attract the people with a clue to an underpaid job.

If we are to remain silent on this issue, then the W3C should not exist.

The Web creates more business value, every day, than has been generated by every single example of an RPC-like interface in the entire history of computers. Businesses would have to be collectively insane to place that architecture at risk just because a group of software marketing giants claims that it is the next big wave. They want people who are experts on the Web architecture to stand up and defend it when needed.

The only reason SOAP remains in the W3C for standardization is because all of the other forums either rejected the concept out of hand or refused to rubber-stamp a poor implementation of a bad idea. If this thing is going to be called Web Services, then I insist that it actually have something to do with the Web. If not, I'd rather have the WS-I group responsible for abusing the marketplace with yet another CORBA/DCOM than have the W3C waste its effort pandering to the whims of marketing consultants. I am not here to accommodate the requirements of mass hysteria.

Cheers,

Roy T. Fielding, Chairman, The Apache Software Foundation (fiel@apache.org) <http://www.apache.org/>

Chief Scientist, Day Software 2 Corporate Plaza, Suite 150 Newport Beach, CA 92660-7929 fax:+1.949.644.5064 (roy.@day.com) <http://www.day.com/>