Here’s a whopper of a bad start from the latest from Dave Orchard;
We need another WS- spec […]
Heh, ok, low blow, but seriously, I think we need another WS-spec like we need another Web. 8-) On to the beef …
WS-MetadataExchange is a perfect example of a spec that could use WS-Get. WS-Mex can’t really refer to WS-Transfer because there’s too many extra verbs. With WS-Get, WS-MEX could define GetMetadata and refer to WS-Get, and WS-Transfer could define Create/Update/Delete and refer to WS-Get. Cool.
Too many verbs, eh? The whole point of the uniform interface is that all verbs are meaningful to all resources; “Put” makes perfect sense to metadata, as does “Delete”. You’d presumably just get an authorization fault back if you tried it in the context of the canonical application described in WS-MEX, but let’s not preclude them from being used in the future please!