home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
- >I am a latecomer, so forgive me if this is naive or old hat.
-
- Nope. Your points are well made. I agree, mostly.
-
- >Clearly the authors of WWW think news is important because WWW has
- >nice capabilities for accessing NNTP servers. What, then, is the
- >motivation for HTTP as opposed to, say, using news with HTML article
- >bodies?
-
- I thought NNTP could replace HTTP wholesale too. The irreconcilable
- difference between a news article and a WWW node is that a WWW node
- is editable. It may change over time. [I don't like this strateby,
- bit that's what's in practice.]
-
- Thus you have the question of versions, locking, the "home address"
- of a document, etc.
-
- Perhaps we could model WWW nodes as sets of articles -- a thread,
- for example, so that each time you edit a node, you generate a
- new ID.
-
- The problem then is, what do you use for the name of the thing?
- (for linking purposes, that is.)
-
- Besides all that, WWW uses addresses -- article lodators, rather
- than article identifiers. A WWW client has no /usr/spool/news
- database to consult to get all its stuff. It can look at
- ftp sites, gopher hosts, etc.
-
- If URN's ever come to town and all the stuff on all those servers
- share a namespace like the usenet message-id namespace, then
- we may have a chance to play the game that way.
-
- But in the mean time, there are several factors that motivate HTTP.
-
- I certainly agree HTTP should look a _lot_ like NNTP.
-
- Dan
-
-
-