RE: granularity/definition of a "service"

Hi David,

A "service" that only receives is equivalent to a write-only memory.  I
have never found that to be a useful service and would like to hear
about the situation you are imagining where it would be a coherent
stand-alone functionality.

Cheers,
Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: public-sws-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sws-ig-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of David Martin
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 8:57 PM
To: Monika Solanki
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: granularity/definition of a "service"

My quick answer is: it depends on the context; that is, on how the 
service provider chooses to organize things.  I think I can imagine an 
organization in which an isolated "receive" or "send" could be regarded 
as a coherent stand-alone functionality.  But, as I said earlier, in 
most cases I would not want to think of it that way.

-- David

Received on Saturday, 18 September 2004 14:43:31 UTC